V 


;S^VV5J]2?%> 


,*      JUN    3  1911      *] 
'6/CJlL  SE>*j5 


%, 


■,%v^ 


BS  2361  .S54  1911 

Sheldon,  Henry  C.  1845-1928 

New  Testament  theology 


NEW  TESTAMENT   THEOLOGY 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK    -    BOSTON   •    CHICAGO 
ATLANTA   •    SAN  FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Limited 

LONDON   •    BOMBAY   •    CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OF  CANADA,  Ltd. 

TORONTO 


NEW  TESTAMENT 
THEOLOGY 


HENRY  C.  SHELDON 

PROFESSOR  IN  BOSTON  UNIVBRSITY 

AND   AUTHOR  OF  "  UNBELIEF  IN   THE  NINETEENTH    CENTURY,* 

"  SACERDOTALISM    IN    THE   NINETEENTH   CENTURY,"    ETC. 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 
191 1 

All  rights  reserved 


Copyright,  1906, 
By  henry  C.   SHELDON. 

Copyright,  1911, 
By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


First  published  elsewhere.     New  and  revised  edition  published  January,  1911. 


Berwick  &  Smith  Co.,  Norwood,  Mass.,  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 

It  has  been  our  endeavor  to  prepare  a  book  which,  on 
the  one  hand,  shall  be  suifficiently  free  from  scholastic 
formality  to  be  fairly  acceptable  to  the  general  reader, 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  sufficiently  compact  in  state- 
ment, logical  in  arrangement,  and  fundamental  in  its 
treatment  of  the  subject-matter,  to  be  fitted  for  service 
as  a  text-book.  The  conviction  that  there  is  room  for 
a  treatise  which  seeks  to  exemplify  these  characteristics 
is  our  principal  excuse  for  presenting  the  volume  to  the 
public. 

The  reader  will  easily  discover  the  critical  standpoint 
of  the  book,  and  will  notice  that  it  is  not  to  be  ascer- 
tained by  mere  reference  to  the  names  of  critics  which 
occur  in  the  volume.  We  have  been  quite  free  to  cite 
judgments,  which  seemed  to  us  to  be  on  the  side  of  a 
sound  consensus,  from  writers  whose  general  standpoint 
is  rather  emphatically  contrasted  with  our  own. 

Boston  University, 
December,  1910. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER    I 
Sources  Back  of  the  New  Testament  Writings. 

PAGB 

I.     General  Glance  at  these  Sources      ....         3 
II.     Pharisaism,  or  the  Later  Jewish  Orthodoxy,  and  its 

Contributions 8 

III.  Alexandrianism,  and  its  Contributions      ...       20 

IV.  Questions  as  to  the  Indebtedness  of  Certain  Special 

Portions  of  the  New  Testament  to  Post-Canonical 
Judaism 36 

CHAPTER   II 

The  Synoptical  Gospels  and  Their  Teachings. 

I.     The  Characteristics  of  these  Gospels  and  the  More 

Probable  Theory  as  to  Their  Interrelations  .         .       39 
II.     The  Story  of  the  Nativity 56 

III.  The  Self -Consciousness  of  Christ  as  a  Subject  of 

Development  and  a  Source  of  Teaching        .         .       59 

IV.  Some    Distinguishing    Characteristics    of   Christ's 

Teaching 68 

V.  The  Trend  of  Christ's    Teaching    Respecting  the 

Nature  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  and  the  Conditions 

of  Entrance 73  1 

VI.     Leading  Conceptions  of  God  as  Set  Forth  by  Christ  .  87 

VII.     Leading  Conceptions  of  Man  and  the  World    .         .  93 


vi  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

VIII.     The  Witness  of  Christ  Respecting  His  Own  Person 

and  Office gg 

\    IX.     Christ's  Teaching  on  the  Progress  and  Consummation 

of  the  Kingdom    .         .         .         .         .         .         .107 


CHAPTER    III 

Portions  of  the  New  Testament  More  or  Less  Akin  to 
THE  Synoptical  Gospels  in  Their  Representation  of 
A  Primitive  Type  of  Christian  Teaching. 

I.  Consideration  of  the  Proper  Compass  of  the  Chapter .     123 

II.  The  Teaching  of  the  First  Part  of  the  Book  of  Acts  .     140 

III.  The  Teaching  of  the  Epistle  of  James     .         .         -153 

IV.  The  Teaching  of  the  Apocalypse     .         .         .         .158 


CHAPTER    IV 
The    Pauline  Theology. 

I.     The  Several  Groups  of  Pauline  Epistles  .         .         .172 
II.     The  Sources  of  the  Pauline  Theology      .         .         .188 

III.  General  Conceptions  of  God,  of  the  World,  and  of 

the  Rational  Creation,  which  Underlie  the  Pauline 
Epistles 199 

IV.  The  Chief  Pauline  Antitheses  —  Flesh  and   Spirit, 

Law  and  Grace    ..... 
V.     The  Person  of  Christ        .... 

VI.     The  Holy  Spirit 

\fll.     The  Reconciling  Work  of  Christ 
>^III.     Justification  and  Regeneration  . 

IX.  The  Unfoldment   and   Manifestation   of   the    New 

Life 

X.  The  Church  and  the  Sacraments 
XI.     The  Second  Advent  and  the  Related  Events 

XII.     The  Teaching  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles     . 


213 
219 
226 
228 
235 

243 
252 
258 
266 


CONTENTS 

vu 

CHAPTER   V 

Modified  Paulinism  —  Hebrews  and  First  Peter. 

I. 

Introductory  Considerations     .... 

PAGE 

II. 

The  Conception  of  God  in  Hebrews  and  First  Peter 

278 

III. 

Hints  on  the  Nature  and  Rank  of  Men  and  Angels 

280 

IV. 

The  Person  of  Christ 

284 

V. 

The  High-Priestly  Work  of  Christ  . 

286 

VI. 

Christian  Life,  Individual  and  Collective  . 

293 

VII. 

Eschatology 

297 

CHAPTER   VI 

The  Johannine  Theology. 

I.     The  Question  of  Authorship 300 

II.     Sources  and  Peculiarities 318 

III.  Johannine  Antitheses       ......  325 

IV.  The  Doctrine  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  .         .         -331 
V.     The  Holy  Spirit       .......  340 

VI.     The  Work  of  Christ 343 

VII.     The  Initiation  and  Unfoldment  of  the  New  Life       .  347 

VIII.     The  Christian  Brotherhood 353 

IX.     Eschatology 356 

X.     Conclusion 358 

Index ...  361 


NEW   TESTAMENT   THEOLOGY 


NEW  TESTAMENT   THEOLOGY 


CHAPTER  I 


SOURCES  BACK    OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 
WRITINGS 

I.  —  General  Glance  at  These  Sources. 

The  distinctive  character  of  Biblical  Theology  makes 
it  appropriate  to  devote  specific  attention  to  the  subject 
of  sources.  As  distinguished  from  Systematic  Theology 
it  is  very  largely  a  historical  discipline.  While  the  former 
directs  attention  to  the  outcome  of  revelation,  and  seeks 
an  orderly  presentation  of  the  doctrines  which  are  de- 
manded by  a  preponderance  of  biblical  and  rational  evi- 
dences, the  latter  is  interested  in  the  stages  of  revelation, 
and  seeks  to  exhibit  the  peculiarities  of  different  doctrinal 
types  in  the  Bible  together  with  the  historical  conditions 
by  which  their  rise  and  development  were  influenced. 

In  a  full  survey  of  the  theme  of  this  chapter  it  will  not 
be  overlooked  that  the  foremost  source  was  the  conscious- 
ness of  Jesus  Christ,  viewed  as  the  spring  of  His  words 
and  deeds.  This  consciousness,  unique  in  itself,  had  a 
unique  power  to  generate  the  new  order  of  life  and  thought 
which  is  mirrored  in  the  apostolic  literature. 

A  source  only  second  in  importance  to  that  named  was 

3 


4  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  books  of  the 
Hebrew  canon.  These  furnished  in  no  small  degree 
content  and  coloring  to  the  consciousness  of  Christ,  and 
supplied  a  background  to  the  religious  thinking  of  all 
the  New  Testament  writers.  Such  foundation  ideas  of  the 
New  Testament  edifice  as  the  absolute  supremacy  of  God, 
His  distinct  personality,  the  intensity  of  His  ethical  life, 
and  His  purpose  to  build  up  a  perpetual  kingdom  of 
righteousness,  belonged  to  the  great  inheritance  which 
was  transmitted  by  the  Hebrew  oracles. 

A  third  source  may  be  described  as  post-canonical  or 
extra-canonical  Judaism.  Very  likely  it  would  be  no  mis- 
take to  affirm  a  certain  analogy  between  the  standpoint 
of  the  primitive  representatives  of  Christianity  and  that 
of  the  Protestant  reformers.  As  the  latter  sought  to 
break  through  the  overgrowth  of  ecclesiastical  tradition, 
and  to  get  back  to  Christian  originals,  so  the  former  felt 
an  incentive  to  disengage  religion  from  Judaic  tradition- 
alism and  to  appeal  directly  to  the  Old  Testament  Scrip- 
tures as  containing  the  more  incorrupt  deposit  of  truth. 
The  analogy  suggests,  nevertheless,  that  the  develop- 
ments of  later  Judaism  may  have  exercised  considerable 
influence  upon  New  Testament  doctrine.  The  Protestant 
reformers,  notwithstanding  their  inclination  to  go  back  to 
the  primitive  springs  of  Christian  truth,  were  unquestion- 
ably influenced  by  the  results  of  patristic  and  scholastic 
thinking.  A  system  which  had  leavened  the  intellect  of 
generations  could  not  suddenly  be  renounced  at  every 
point.  If  antipathy  to  some  of  its  features  drove  into 
counter  tenets  of  a  specially  pronounced  character,  other 
features  remained  unchallenged  and  entered  into  the  new 


THE   QUESTION   OF  SOURCES  5 

theological  structure  which  was  designed  to  take  the  place 
of  the  old.  It  seems,  therefore,  in  the  light  of  the  his- 
torical parallel,  to  be  probable  that  post-canonical  Judaism 
was  somewhat  of  a  factor  in  shaping  the  theological  con- 
ceptions which  have  come  to  expression  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, and  that  it  wrought  in  the  way  of  attraction  as 
well  as  of  repulsion. 

Further  illustration  of  the  obligations  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament to  the  first  two  sources  will  be  left  to  be  brought 
out,  as  occasion  may  arise,  in  connection  with  the  various 
subdivisions  of  our  theme.  As  repects  the  third  source, 
since  its  consideration  is  somewhat  off  the  track  of  the 
more  ordinary  theological  study,  it  will  be  well  to  give  it 
specific  attention  in  this  connection. 

In  post-canonical  Judaism  the  principal  factors  of 
which  note  needs  to  be  taken  were  the  Pharisaic  and 
Hellenistic  systems.  The  latter  of  these  had  its  culmi- 
nating expression  in  the  Jewish  community  of  Alexandria. 
We  may  say  then  in  brief  terms,  that  post-canonical 
Judaism  made  its  principal  contributions  to  New  Testa- 
ment theology  through  Pharisaism  and  Alexandrianism. 
This  statement  implies  that  the  Sadducean  and  Essenic 
schools  exercised  a  subordinate  influence  upon  Christian 
thinking.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  this  was  the 
case  with  the  former,  and  our  conviction  is  that  it  was 
true,  though  in  a  less  emphatic  sense,  of  the  latter. 

The  Sadducees  were  more  largely  an  aristocratic  and 
political  party  than  a  theological  school.  They  had  place 
only  so  long  as  Judaism  played  a  political  role.  Nothing 
was  heard  of  them  after  the  complete  overthrow  of  the 
Jewish  people  had  cancelled  opportunities  for  diplomacy 


6  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

and  political  management.  Doubtless  the  Sadducees 
had  somewhat  of  a  special  theological  interest,  but  it  was 
not  intense  enough  to  exercise  any  appreciable  influence 
beyond  their  own  limits.  If  on  one  side  their  position 
was  acceptable  to  the  Christian  standpoint,  namely  as 
respects  their  rejection  of  the  traditions  with  which  the 
Pharisees  had  supplemented  the  written  law,  on  another 
side,  that  is,  in  their  negative  attitude  toward  the  future 
life,  they  came  into  sharp  collision  with  Christian  senti- 
ment. On  the  whole,  the  connection  of  the  Sadducees 
with  the  rise  of  Christianity  was  simply  external.  It  did 
not  reach  to  doctrinal  content. 

A  much  greater  religious  earnestness  belonged  to 
Essenism  than  to  Sadduceeism.  In  some  of  its  teach- 
ings, also,  phases  more  or  less  parallel  to  gospel  precepts 
may  be  specified.  If  Christ  reprobated  the  taking  of 
oaths,  taught  His  disciples  to  foster  peace  as  opposed  to 
warlike  violence,  inculcated  an  unworldly  temper,  spoke 
a  word  of  commendation  of  those  practicing  continence 
for  the  sake  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  strongly  em- 
phasized the  duty  of  unselfish  and  brotherly  ministering. 
He  set  forth  features  of  an  ideal  that  was  recognized  in 
the  maxims  of  the  Essenes.  Some  writers  have  supposed 
that  Christ  had  a  special  connection  with  this  Jewish 
association,  and  that  His  discourses  show  the  tinge  of  its 
tuition.  But  this  conclusion  is  to  be  regarded  as  doubt- 
ful for  the  following  reasons:  (i)  Most  of  the  points 
mentioned  as  having  their  counterpart  in  the  teaching  of 
the  Essenes  were  the  dictate  of  Christ's  fundamental 
views  of  God  and  man.  There  was  a  sufficient  source 
for  them  in  the  clear  and  balanced  religious  intuition  with 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  7 

which  He  was  so  richly  endowed.  (2)  The  formal  re- 
semblance between  precepts  does  not  exclude  at  all  points 
material  differences  in  conception.  For  example,  if 
Christ,  as  reported  by  the  evangelist,  spoke  favorably  of 
some  who  had  made  themselves  eunuchs  for  the  sake  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  He  could  not  have  done  so  in  the 
interest  of  the  ascetic  standpoint  which  dictated  the 
opposition  of  the  Essenes  to  marriage ;  for  the  general 
tenor  of  His  teaching  is  emphatically  opposed  to  that 
standpoint.  (3)  In  central  and  fundamental  respects  the 
system  of  Christ's  teaching  is  opposed  to  the  Essenic. 
The  governing  point  of  view  of  the  latter  was  purity  in 
the  legal  and  ceremonial  sense;  on  this  line  it  was  a 
species  of  high  Pharisaism.  The  former  placed  absolutely 
no  stress  on  ceremonial  purity  as  compared  with  interior 
morality  and  religion.  Again,  the  one  was  monastic  and 
separatistic  in  spirit,  seeking  for  holiness  by  isolation 
from  a  contaminating  world ;  the  other  was  animated  by 
a  spirit  of  world-embracing  sympathy,  and  welcomed 
communication  with  all  classes  and  conditions  of  men 
who  needed  to  be  benefited.  These  are  important  con- 
trasts. In  the  light  of  them  it  does  not  seem  too  much 
to  say  with  Wellhausen  :  ''  The  Essenes  were  not  fore- 
runners of  Christianity,  to  which  this  kind  of  esoterism 
and  of  separation  from  sinners  was  originally  entirely 
foreign."  ^  While  claiming  this  much  it  is  not  necessary 
to  affirm  that  no  sort  of  stimulus,  no  element  of  religious 

1  Israelitische  und  Jiidische  Geschichte,  p.  296.  Compare  H.  J. 
Holtzmann,  Lehrbuch  der  neutestamentlichen  Theologie,  I.  118;  Har- 
nack,  What  is  Christianity  1  p.  32 ;  Schultz,  Grundriss  der  christlichen 
Apologetik,  p.  146. 


8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

conception  or  work,  came  from  Essenism.  As  a  part  of 
the  environment  inclosing  an  incipient  Christianity  it  may 
have  had  its  effect.  Our  contention  is  that  there  is  in- 
sufficient ground  for  regarding  it  as  a  prominent  factor 
in  shaping  Christian  thought. 


11.  —  Pharisaism,  or  the  Later  Jewish  Orthodoxy, 
AND  ITS  Contributions. 

Pharisaism  stands  for  the  characteristic  development 
of  post-exilian  piety  in  Israel.  It  names  the  great  central 
channel  in  which  earnest  religion  flowed  from  the  days 
of  Ezra.  As  a  distinct  party  the  Pharisees  may  not  have 
antedated  the  Maccabean  crisis.  But  the  tendency,  of 
which  they  represented  the  matured  stage,  or  rather  the 
exaggerated  development,  went  back  to  the  era  of  that 
national  rebuilding  which  was  undertaken  by  the  returned 
exiles.  This  tendency  did  not  dominate  the  entire 
national  life,  at  least  for  any  considerable  interval ; 
nevertheless,  it  was  central  to  the  religious  movement, 
especially  of  Palestinian  Judaism,  from  Ezra  to  Paul. 
The  natural  outcome  of  that  movement  was  the  identifi- 
cation of  Jewish  orthodoxy  with  Pharisaism. 

In  judging  of  the  dogmatic  contents  of  Pharisaism  in 
the  first  century  it  is  legitimate  to  make  much  use  of  the 
Talmud.  For,  while  this  great  compendium  of  Jewish 
legal  and  religious  lore  was  not  completed  till  some  cen- 
turies later,  the  traditions  which  it  incorporates  and  the 
type  which  it  exhibits  were  doubtless  in  large  part  extant 
by  the  time  of  Christ's  public  ministry.  This  conclusion 
is  strongly  supported  by  the  correspondence  between  the 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  9 

image  of  Pharisaism  which  it  mirrors  and  that  which  is 
given  in  the  Gospels.  In  addition  to  the  Talmud  we  may 
properly  employ  a  number  of  writings,  mostly  pseud- 
epigraphic,  which  were  written  between  170  B.C.  and 
A.D.  100.  Here  belong  the  Book  of  Enoch,  the  Psalms 
of  Solomon,  the  Assumption  of  Moses,  the  Apocalypse 
of  Baruch,  the  Fourth  Book  of  Ezra,  the  Book  of  Jubilees, 
and  some  of  the  Sibylline  verses. 

The  adverse  associations  which  go  with  Pharisaism 
should  not  blind  us  to  the  fact  that  at  the  start  it  repre- 
sented a  doctrine  of  the  law  which  in  large  part  was  the 
dictate  of  a  praiseworthy  zeal  for  righteousness,  and  that 
it  always  acknowledged  many  excellent  points  both  in 
practical  ethics  and  in  religious  doctrine.  Its  fatal  error 
was  that  it  ultimately  went  on  to  such  an  exaggerated 
and  particularistic  stress  upon  the  law  as  brought  life 
under  bondage  to  positive  rules,  and  left  little  place  for 
a  consideration  of  the  demands  of  interior  piety. 

It  is  an  almost  incredible  externalization  of  religion 
which  is  ascribed  to  Pharisaism  in  some  of  the  strictures 
of  Christ.  Doubtless  His  strong  words  cannot  justly  be 
applied  in  all  their  length  and  breadth  to  every  man  who 
was  enrolled  among  the  Pharisees.  But  as  regards  the 
controlling  animus  of  Pharisaism,  it  cannot  be  said  that 
they  savor  of  oratorical  exaggeration.  The  sources  con- 
firm the  conclusion  that  in  its  progressive  evolution 
Pharisaism  reached  such  a  pass,  that  it  could  fairly  be 
described  as  legality  run  mad.  As  is  clearly  shown  in 
Weber's  learned  treatise  on  the  later  Jewish  Theology,^ 

1  Jiidische  Theologie  auf  Grund  des  Talmud  iind  Verwandter 
Schriften. 


lO        NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  resources  of  language  were  exhausted  in  enforcing 
the  importance  and  sanctity  of  the  law.  The  Scriptures 
containing  it  were  represented  as  written  with  the  highest 
degree  of  inspiration.  It  was  often  identified  with  the 
heavenly  wisdom,  and  was  therefore  viewed  as  preexisting 
in  God  before  the  foundation  of  the  world.  It  was  de- 
scribed as  an  image  of  God's  spiritual  essence,  or  as  the 
daughter  of  God.  All  things  necessary  to  salvation,  it 
was  asserted,  are  contained  in  it.  To  supplement  it  is 
impossible ;  it  is  complete  and  is  valid  for  all  time,  yea, 
for  eternity.  The  study  of  it  takes  precedence  of  all 
other  duties.  Everything  closely  associated  with  it  de- 
rives from  the  relation  honor  and  sanctification.  The 
Hebrew,  as  the  language  of  the  law,  is  the  preferred 
speech,  the  tongue  employed  by  angels.  All  the  moun- 
tains contended  for  the  honor  of  being  the  theatre  of  the 
proclamation  of  the  law.  All  the  world  was  hushed  into 
complete  silence  when  God  spoke  the  sacred  code.  As 
the  people  of  the  law  Israel  has  a  character  of  special 
holiness.  The  outside  peoples  are  unclean ;  they  make 
no  part  of  the  kindom  of  God,  and  are  not  destined  to 
eternal  life.  The  ministry  of  angels  is  confined  to  Israel, 
while  the  heathen  world  constitutes  the  proper  field  of 
demons.  The  course  of  nature  is  sustained  for  the  sake 
of  the  people  of  the  law.^  Were  it  not  for  them,  God 
would  not  think  it  worth  while  to  give  either  rain  or  sun- 
shine. The  study  of  the  law  is  not  unbecoming  even  to 
the  majesty  of  God.  Says  one  rabbi :  **The  day  has 
twelve  hours ;  in  the  first  three  the  Holy  One  sits  and 

1  Compare  Fourth  Ezra,  vi.  55-59,  vii.  11. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  n 

busies  Himself  with  the  law."  Very  likely  some  of  these 
statements  go  beyond  the  average  sentiment  of  Pharisa- 
ism, but  they  indicate  the  goal  toward  which  it  tended, 
and  reflect  with  approximate  fairness  the  spirit  by  which 
it  was  ruled. 

Somewhat  of  a  deistic  character  evidently  pertained  to 
this  way  of  thinking,  which  recognized  little  else  in  God 
but  the  lawgiver,  and  made  the  way  of  approach  to  Him 
a  long  line  of  legal  performances.  It  does  not  appear, 
however,  that  Pharisaism  was  formally  deistic  in  its 
theory.  It  inculcated  a  strong  view  of  divine  providence. 
According  to  the  representation  of  Josephus,  the  Phari- 
sees believed  both  in  the  divine  ordering  of  events  and 
in  the  free  will  of  men.^ 

The  Pharisaic  conception  of  personal  salvation  corre- 
sponded to  the  dominance  which  was  given  to  the  legal 
point  of  view.  The  ruling  idea  was  legal  performance 
in  the  sight  of  God,  rather  than  transforming  fellowship 
with  God.  Repentance,  it  was  taught,  secures  indul- 
gence for  past  sins,  while  performance  of  the  works  pre- 
scribed by  the  law  creates  a  title  to  positive  rewards. 
In  this  relation  a  vicarious  function  was  admitted.  It 
was  conceived  that  in  virtue  of  the  solidarity  of  Israel 
the  sufferings  of  a  righteous  man,  and  especially  his  un- 
deserved death,  might  serve  to  expiate  the  sins  of  the 
people,  and  that  in  general  the  merits  of  the  forefathers 
might  help  to  enlarge  the  credit  of  a  later  generation. 

It  does  not  appear  that  the  doctrine  of  a  vicarious  ex- 
piation of  sins  through   suffering  was  applied  in  later 

^Antiq.  Bk.  xviii.  chap,  i;  Wars  of  the  Jews,  Bk.  II.  chap,  viii,  §  14. 


12  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Judaism,  at  least  in  its  more  characteristic  teaching,  to 
the  Messiah.  The  references  to  a  suffering  Messiah  are 
not  of  sufficient  weight,  in  comparison  with  representa- 
tions of  an  opposite  nature,  to  stand  in  the  way  of  the 
conclusion  that  later  Jewish  orthodoxy  gave  little  place 
in  its  Messianic  forecast  to  such  a  picture  as  is  contained 
either  in  the  fifty- third  chapter  of  Isaiah  or  in  the  gospel 
story  of  the  cross. ^  Some  scholars  have  supposed  that 
it  was  in  particular  a  disinclination  to  refer  to  the  Mes- 
siah the  Old  Testament  texts  descriptive  of  suffering 
and  death  that  led  to  the  introduction  of  a  subordinate 
Messiah  of  the  house  of  Joseph,  to  whom  the  more  som- 
bre element  in  prophetical  anticipation  could  be  apphed.^ 
The  information,  however,  respecting  the  genesis  in 
Jewish  thought  of  the  Messiah  Ben  Joseph  is  very 
scanty.^ 

The  conception  of  the  nature  and  rank  of  the  Messiah 
appears  to  have  been  a  somewhat  wavering  one  in  post- 
exilian  Judaism.  In  some  of  the  apocalyptic  writings, 
notably  in  the  second  section  of  the  Book  of  Enoch 
(chapters  xxxvii-lxxi)  and  in  the  Fourth  Book  of  Ezra 
(vii.,  xiii.,  xiv.),  the  Messiah  is  described  in  language 
which  imports  that  he  was  regarded  as  a  superhuman 
and  heavenly  being,  in  a  peculiar  sense  the  Son  of  God. 
Especially  in  the  Book  of  Enoch  is  this  high  rank  dis- 


1  Schiirer,  Geschichte  des  jiidischen  Volkesim  Zeitalter  Jesu  Christi, 
§  29;  Weber,  Jiidische  Theologie,  §§  79,  80;  Stanton  in  Hastings'  Dic- 
tionary of  the  Bible,  III.  354;  Lagrange,  Le  Messianisme,  pp.  236  fiF. 

2  Baldensperger,  Das  Selbstbewusstsein  Jesu,  pp.  143-155. 

*  A  mention  occurs  in  the  Talmud,  Tract  Succah,  chap,  v,  Rodkin- 
son's  translation.    See  also  the  references  in  Weber,  §  80. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  13 

tinctly  asserted.  According  to  its  representations  the 
name  of  the  Messiah  was  named  on  high  before  the  sun 
and  the  signs  were  created,  and  before  the  stars  of 
heaven  were  made.  He  is  to  be  a  staff  to  the  righteous, 
a  Hght  to  the  Gentiles  and  the  hope  of  all  the  troubled 
of  heart.  Before  him  all  the  dwellers  on  the  face  of 
the  earth  are  to  bow.  The  sum  of  judgment  is  to 
be  committed  to  him,  and  the  secrets  of  wisdom  will 
stream  forth  from  his  mouth.  Thus  the  Book  of  Enoch 
approaches  the  New  Testament  point  of  view  respecting 
the  position  of  the  Christ.  And  it  has  a  further  point 
of  comparison  with  the  New  Testament  in  that  it  em- 
ploys in  part  the  same  descriptive  titles,  such  as  the 
Elect  One,  the  Righteous  One,  the  Son  of  Man.^ 

1  The  measure  of  confidence  with  which  this  high  conception  of  the 
Messiah  can  be  regarded  as  a  mirror  of  Jewish  thinking  will  of  course 
depend  appreciably  upon  the  evidence  for  the  pre-Christian  origin  of  the 
Similitudes,  as  the  second  section  of  the  Book  of  Enoch  is  called.  It  is 
possible  to  surmise  here  an  infusion  of  Christian  thought,  in  case  the 
origin  of  Christianity  preceded  the  composition  of  the  Similitudes.  On 
the  question  of  date  scholars  are  divided.  A  majority  consider  that  the 
Simihtudes  contain  too  little  of  specifically  Christian  matter  to  make  it 
at  all  probable  that  they  came  as  a  whole  from  a  Christian  hand,  even  if 
it  be  supposed  that  they  include  aught  from  that  source.  The  most  re- 
cent editors  find  no  insuperable  difficulty  in  the  way  of  the  supposition 
that  this  entire  portion  of  the  Book  of  Enoch  originated  before  Pom- 
pey's  invasion  of  Jerusalem.  Such  is  the  judgment  of  R.  H.  Charles  in 
his  translation  and  commentary;  also  of  Georg  Beer  in  Kautzsch's 
Apokryphen  und  Pseudepigraphen  des  Alten  Testaments,  II.  230-232. 
On  the  basis  of  this  chronology  the  recurring  phrase  "  the  kings  and  the 
mighty  "  is  made  to  refer  to  the  Asmonean  princes  and  their  Sadducean 
allies.  Bousset  prefers  to  find  in  this  phrase  a  reference  to  foreign  rulers, 
and  thinks  that  the  composition  of  the  Similitudes  occurred  in  the 
troubled  era  between  the  fall  of  the  Asmonean  line  and  the  reign  of  Herod 
(Die  Religion  des  Judentums  im  neutestamentlichen  Zeitalter,  p.  13). 


14  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

On  the  other  hand  there  are  descriptions  in  the  later 
Jewish  writings  which  do  not  carry  the  rank  of  the  Mes- 
siah above  that  of  an  exalted  human  potentate.  The 
tendency  within  the  circle  of  Pharisaic  or  orthodox 
Judaism  may  be  judged  to  have  been  in  the  direction  of 
the  latter  view.  This  was  the  current  theory  in  the 
second  century,  if  we  may  draw  a  conclusion  from  the 
words  which  Justin  Martyr  put  into  the  mouth  of  the 
Jew  Trypho,  for  they  express  the  belief  that  the  Messiah 
was  to  be  simply  a  man  sprung  from  men.^  Perhaps,  as 
Holtzmann  suggests,  the  fact  that  Christianity  took  up 
and  propagated  the  higher  view  of  the  rank  of  the 
Messiah,  may  have  helped  toward  its  general  renuncia- 
tion within  the  bounds  of  Judaism.^ 

The  office  of  the  Messiah  was  given  very  largely  an 
eschatological  relation.  It  appears  that  from  the  Macca- 
bean  period  to  the  end  of  the  first  century  of  the  Chris- 
tian era  Jewish  theological  thinking  was  concentrated  in 
no  small  degree  upon  eschatology.  The  Book  of  Daniel 
was  followed  by  a  line  of  apocalyptic  effusions  which 
present  in  dramatic  colors  the  events  of  the  last  days. 
Two  of  these,  the  apocalypse  of  Baruch  and  the  Fourth 
Book  of  Ezra,  written,  it  is  supposed,  not  far  from  the 
year  70  of  the  Christian  era,  may  be  regarded  as  giving 
the  outlines  of  the  matured  eschatology  of  later  Judaism. 
The  time  of  their  composition  makes  it  indeed  possible 
that  Christian  thinking  may  have  influenced  at  one  point 
or  another  their  representations;  but,  on  the  other  hand,, 
the   antipathy  of   Jewish  writers  of  that   era  to   Chris- 

1  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  xlix. 

2  Lehrbuch  der  neutestamentlichen  Theologie,  I.  84. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  15 

tianity  stood  in  the  way  of  borrowing  from  its  contents. 
Moreover,  the  two  treatises  named  are  congenially  re- 
lated to  other  Jewish  writings  which  deal  with  the  sub- 
ject of  eschatology.  Accordingly,  there  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  they  represent  with  substantial  fidelity  the 
trend  of  Jewish  orthodoxy  in  that  era.  Their  scheme 
of  eschatology,  as  summarized  by  Schiirer,^  embraces 
the  following  points  :  (i)  A  final  season  of  stress  and 
confusion;  (2)  the  coming  of  Elijah  as  forerunner; 
(3)  the  appearance  of  the  Messiah ;  (4)  a  final  attack  of 
hostile  powers;  (5)  destruction  of  the  hostile  •  powers ; 
(6)  renewal  of  Jerusalem ;  (7)  gathering  of  the  dispersed ; 
(8)  the  kingdom  of  glory  in  Palestine ;  (9)  renewal  of 
the  world;  (10)  the  general  resurrection  of  the  dead; 
(11)  the  final  judgment  and  eternal  salvation  and  dam- 
nation. As  regards  the  resurrection,  it  may  be  noticed 
that  the  earlier  view  confined  it  to  the  righteous.  The 
Psalms  of  Solomon,  composed  probably  near  the  time  of 
Pompey's  invasion  of  Jerusalem,  seem  to  favor  this  view,^ 
and  it  is  ascribed  to  the  Pharisees  in  the  sketch  of  their 
beliefs  by  Josephus.^  The  same  limitation  appears  in 
some  sections  of  the  Book  of  Enoch.^  In  certain  in- 
stances the  resurrection  of  all  Israel,  but  with  a  possible 
exclusion  of  the  Gentiles,  was  assumed.^  Several  writ- 
ings, aside  from  those  representative  of  the  Alexandrian 


1  Geschichte    des   jiidischen  Volkes  im  Zeitalter   Jesu  Christi,  §  29, 
pp.  440-464. 

2  Psalms  of  Solomon,  iii.  13,  16,  xv.  i. 

3  Antiq.  xviii.  i  ;  Wars  of  the  Jews,  II.  viii.  14. 
*  Book  of  Enoch,  xci.  -civ. 

^Book  of  Enoch,  li.  i,  2;  2  Maccabees  xii.  42-44. 


l6  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

theology,  apparently  contemplate  only  a  resurrection  of 
the  spirits  of  the  dead.^ 

The  foregoing  exposition  affords  a  basis  for  estimating 
the  influence  of  Pharisaism  upon  New  Testament  theol- 
ogy. That  it  wrought  as  a  developing  force  by  way  of 
repulsion  is  quite  evident.  Its  overstrained  legality  gave 
occasion  to  a  distinct  and  energetic  exposition  of  the 
deep  interior  demands  of  true  piety.  It  drew  from 
Christ  the  most  intense  protest  against  allowing  the  form 
to  usurp  the  place  which  belongs  to  the  spirit,  and  served 
as  the  background  against  which  he  set  forth  clearly 
defined  and  imperishable  images  of  a  spiritual  religion. 
With  Paul  also  Pharisaism  was  a  motive-power  to  intense 
stress  upon  the  subjective  demands  of  religion.  Had 
not  the  apostle  lived  within  the  system  and  realized  in 
the  depths  of  his  soul  its  incompetency  to  bring  emanci- 
pation and  true  peace,  he  would  not  have  been  prepared 
to  champion  with  such  marvellous  and  untiring  fervor 
the  cause  of  evangelical  freedom  against  the  role  of 
legal  servitude. 

As  regards  positive  influences  coming  from  Pharisaism, 
it  is  not  easy  to  measure  them  exactly  through  the  whole 
range  of  doctrinal  topics,  since  there  is  room  for  the 
question  whether  given  aspects  of  teaching  are  to  be 
reckoned  as  outgrowths  of  Old  Testament  principles,  or 
as  showing  the  imprint  of  contemporary  Jewish  ortho- 
doxy. On  various  points,  however,  there  are  grounds 
for  a  fairly  satisfactory  inference. 

1  Psalms  of  Solomon  ;  Book  of  Jubilees ;  Assumption  of  Moses ;  4 
Maccabees.  See  R.  H.  Charles,  Eschatology,  Hebrew,  Jewish,  and 
Christian. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  17 

It  was  noticed  that  in  the  sketch  by  Josephus  the 
Pharisees  are  represented  as  holding,  on  the  one  hand,  a 
strong  view  of  divine  sovereignty  over  events,  and  on 
the  other  contending  for  the  fact  of  free  will  in  men. 
As  to  whether  they  had  any  way  of  reconciling  these 
contrasted  views,  or  made  any  attempt  to  show  their 
congruity,  the  historian  says  nothing.  Commentators 
have  discovered  a  like  uncancelled  antinomy  in  the  New 
Testament.  Especially  has  this  been  observed  in  the 
writings  of  Paul.  There  are  sentences  in  his  epistles 
which  seem  to  place  no  limit  upon  the  divine  ordering, 
and  there  are  sentences  which  clearly  enough  assume 
the  free  and  responsible  agency  of  men.  Was  Paul  in 
this  matter  exhibiting  points  of  view  which  he  had  in- 
herited from  Pharisaism  ?  It  is  quite  easy  to  suspect 
that  to  have  been  the  case.  But  two  things  may  serve 
to  check  a  confident  conclusion  in  that  direction.  In 
the  first  place,  the  double  view  in  question  —  the  pro- 
found stress  upon  divine  ordering  and  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  man's  free  agency  —  was  no  exclusive  property 
of  Pharisaism,  but  very  largely  characteristic  of  the  Old 
Testament.  In  the  second  place,  it  belongs  intrinsically 
to  the  mode  of  earnest  religious  oratory  both  to  accentu- 
ate in  strong  terms  God's  overruling  wisdom  and  might, 
and  to  address  men  as  free  and  responsible.  It  lies  out- 
side the  plane  of  oratory  to  reconcile  the  opposing  views. 
To  do  that  is  the  function  of  philosophical  reflection. 
It  seems  to  follow,  therefore,  that  Paul,  simply  as  the 
Old  Testament  student  and  the  religious  orator,  could 
very  well  have  been  led  to  use  the  forms  of  expression 
under  consideration.     It  is  to  be  granted,  nevertheless, 


l8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

that  it  might  not  have  been  so  natural  for  him  to  use 
them  had  he  been  reared  as  a  Sadducee  instead  of  being 
trained  in  the  school  of  the  Pharisees. 

The  same  order  of  remark  applies  to  the  Pauline  stress 
upon  the  connection  of  the  Adamic  trespass  with  the 
prevalence  of  sin  and  death  in  the  world.  That  stress 
is  fully  paralleled  in  Fourth  Ezra  and  the  Apocalypse  of 
Baruch,  books  which  indeed  were  of  later  origin  than  the 
Pauline  writings,  but  which  may  be  supposed  to  repre- 
sent at  least  a  considerable  current  of  thought  in  the 
Pharisaism  of  an  earlier  time.^  There  is,  therefore,  a 
certain  probability  that  Paul's  Pharisaic  training  had 
something  to  do  with  his  strong  view  of  the  results  of 
Adam's  sin ;  though,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  quite  con- 
ceivable that  he  may  have  gained  the  major  part  of  the 
incentive  to  his  representations  from  Old  Testament 
suggestions  and  his  own  earnest  contemplation  of  the 
contrast  between  Adam  and  Christ. 

As  respects  the  person  and  work  of  the  Messiah,  the 
Pharisaic  view  appears  far  more  in  contrast  than  in  affin- 
ity with  the  New  Testament  teaching.  The  one  contem- 
plated preeminently  a  national  deliverer  and  ruler ;  the 
other  pictures  the  redeemer  of  the  human  race.  The 
one  supposed  that  the  Messiah's  reign  would  be  realized 
mainly  through  visible  earthly  instrumentalities ;  the 
other  makes  large  account  of  invisible  spiritual  agency 

1  Fourth  Ezra,  iii.  7,  21,  22,  iv.  30,  vii.  118;  Apocalypse  of  Baruch, 
xxiii.  4,  xlviii.  42,  liv.  15.  Compare  Ecclesiasticus,  xxv.  24.  In  contrast 
with  these  sources,  the  Book  of  Enoch  and  the  Book  of  Jubilees  em- 
phasize the  corrupting  agency  of  apostate  angels.  For  a  survey  of  the 
subject  see  Bousset,  Die  Religion  des  Judentums  im  neutestamentlichen 
Zeitalter,  pp.  384-391. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  19 

and  of  the  efficacy  of  heart  association  with  an  ideal  per- 
sonality. The  one  tended  toward  a  simple  humanitarian 
conception  of  the  Messiah ;  the  other,  while  giving  a 
much  purer  and  more  beautiful  ideal  of  the  humanity  of 
Christ  than  was  grasped  by  its  rival,  exhibits  unequivocal 
tokens  of  faith  in  his  superhuman  dignity  and  unique 
connection  with  the  divine.  The  idea  of  vicarious  atone- 
ment appears  in  both  ;  but,  as  has  been  noticed,  this  idea 
in  the  Pharisaic  system  was  given  a  very  faint  associa- 
tion with  the  Messiah,  and  reduces  to  the  conception 
that  in  virtue  of  the  solidarity  of  Israel  the  doing  or  suf- 
fering of  one  member  may  serve  as  a  ground  of  indul- 
gence toward  a  less  deserving  member.  It  is  possible, 
as  Pfieiderer  supposes,^  that  Paul  proceeded  from  this 
conception  as  a  starting-point  when  he  undertook  to 
construe  the  work  of  Christ.  However  this  may  be,  it 
is  not  to  be  overlooked  that  Paul's  total  theory  is  pretty 
broadly  contrasted  with  the  Pharisaic  conception.  Not 
only  does  the  former  give  a  central  importance  to  the 
atoning  work  of  the  Christ  which  was  quite  unknown  to 
the  latter ;  it  joins  with  the  notion  of  an  objective  atone- 
ment the  idea  of  a  mystical  union  with  Christ,  and  makes 
this  no  less  than  the  other  part  and  parcel  of  the  divine 
plan  of  salvation.  This  idea,  it  does  not  need  to  be  said, 
was  quite  beyond  the  Pharisaic  circle  of  thought.  On 
the  whole,  the  Pauline  theory  of  Christ's  work  cannot  be 
regarded  as  makingany  very  distinct  revelation  of  the  dis- 
ciple of  the  Pharisees.  Even  as  regards  the  elementary  con- 
ception of  a  vicarious  atonement,  or  meritorious  doing  and 

1  Das  Urchristenthum,  p.  171,  edition  of  1887. 


20  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

suffering  on  behalf  of  another,  suggestions  enough  could 
have  been  found  by  the  apostle  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 
As  regards  eschatology,  it  must  be  granted  that  the 
later  Jewish  orthodoxy  seems  to  have  given  considerable 
coloring,  not  to  say  content,  to  the  New  Testament. 
The  reader  of  the  New  Testament  cannot  fail  to  notice 
that  in  one  connection  or  another  nearly  all  the  points 
which  have  been  mentioned  as  characteristic  of  the 
Pharisaic  eschatology  come  into  view.  The  representa- 
tions of  the  former  have  of  course  less  of  a  Jewish  out- 
look than  those  of  the  latter.  The  two,  however,  picture 
much  the  same  succession  of  unfoldments.  The  germs 
maybe  found  in  the  Old  Testament,  but  it  is  known  that 
eschatology  was  a  vital  part  of  the  dogmatic  thinking  of 
Judaism  in  the  post-Maccabean  period,  and  it  is  probable 
that  its  general  framework  was  well  intrenched  in  the 
minds  of  those  who  penned  the  New  Testament  writings. 
It  may  be  added  in  this  connection  that  on  the  subjects 
of  angelology  and  demonology  the  New  Testament  re- 
flects very  largely  post-exilic  developments.  That  a  dif- 
ference, however,  goes  with  the  resemblance  will  not  be 
overlooked  by  one  who  reflects  on  the  warm  and  intense 
view  of  the  divine  immanence  which  is  characteristic  of 
the  New  Testament.  Angelic  mediation  in  connection 
with  such  a  view  naturally  assumes  less  importance  than 
was  given  it  in  later  Judaism  with  its  relatively  distant  God. 


III.  —  Alexandrianism  and  its  Contributions. 

Alexandrianism,    as  the   term  is  used  here,  denotes 
Judaism  under  the  influence  of  Greek  philosophy  and 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES        21 

animated  by  a  pronounced  ambition  to  show  the  entire 
harmony  between  itself  and  the  best  content  of  that 
philosophy.  It  found  literary  expression  especially  in  the 
book  entitled  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  and  in  the  writings 
of  Philo.  The  former  very  likely  originated  in  the  cen- 
tury preceding  the  Christian  era.  The  latter  were  written 
within  the  first  half  of  the  first  Christian  century. 
Attempts  have  been  made  to  discover  signs  of  the  dis- 
tinctive Alexandrian  style  of  thinking  in  some  earlier 
writings,  more  especially  in  Ecclesiasticus,  in  the  Septu- 
agint  translation  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  in  the  Third 
Book  of  the  Sibylline  Oracles.  But  the  signs  are  too 
faint  to  afford  anything  more  than  a  doubtful  warrant 
for  associating  these  writings  with  the  peculiar  philosophy 
which  found  in  Philo  its  culminating  expression. 

In  its  attitude  toward  the  law  Alexandrianism  was 
characterized  by  a  much  freer  spirit  than  that  which 
ruled  Pharisaism.  As  represented  by  Philo  it  taught 
indeed  that  the  prescriptions  of  the  law  ought  to  be 
literally  fulfilled  ;  but  evidently  it  did  not  regard  them  as 
possessing  in  themselves  the  importance  which  they  had 
for  the  eyes  of  the  Pharisaic  doctors.  A  principal  reason 
urged  by  Philo  for  the  literal  fulfillment  was  its  adaptation 
to  prepare  one  to  understand  better  the  deeper  meaning 
of  the  law.^  It  was  mainly  the  ethical  and  philosophical 
truth  which  the  pentateuchal  system  was  regarded  as 
shadowing  forth  that  interested  Philo  and  the  men  of  his 
school.  We  find  him  speaking  in  the  best  vein  of  Jewish 
prophecy  on  the  worthlessness  of  sacrifices  apart  from 

1  Migration  of  Abraham,  xvi.     Works,  II.  64,  Yonge's  translation. 


22  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  appropriate  inner  disposition.  "  In  the  eyes  of  God," 
he  says,  "  it  is  not  the  number  of  things  sacrificed  that  is 
accounted  valuable,  but  the  purity  of  the  rational  spirit  of 
the  sacrificer  .  .  .  The  altar  of  God  is  the  grateful  soul  of 
the  wise  man."^ 

As  respects  biblical  interpretation,  Alexandrianism 
cannot  be  regarded  as  having  resorted  to  an  altogether 
exceptional  course  in  its  espousal  of  allegory.  In  the 
later  Jewish  exegesis  generally  the  door  stood  open  to 
allegorical  interpretations.  The  rabbis  entertained  the 
notion  that  the  Scriptures,  as  the  product  of  an  infinite 
author,  have  no  such  limited  significance  as  pertains  to 
an  ordinary  human  composition,  but  contain  even  in  their 
individual  statements  manifold  meanings.^  From  this 
standpoint  there  was  no  check  upon  allegorizing  aside 
from  convenience  and  custom.  The  peculiarity  of  Alex- 
andrianism was,  on  the  one  hand,  its  extraordinary 
industry  in  drawing  out  the  mystical  or  allegorical  sense 
of  Scripture,  and,  on  the  other,  the  degree  to  which  it 
made  allegorical  interpretations  a  means  of  satisfying  its 
ambition  to  represent  Judaism  as  embracing  much  of  the 
content  of  the  Gentile  philosophies.^ 


1  On  those  who  offer  Sacrifice,  iv.,  v.     Works,  III.  233-5. 

2 In  a  Talmudic  comment  on  Jer.  xxiii.  29  it  is  remarked:  "As  a 
hammer  divideth  fire  into  many  sparks,  so  one  verse  of  Scripture  has 
many  meanings  and  many  explanations."  (Sanhedrin,  fol.  34,  col.  i,  cited 
by  Hershon,  Talmudic  Miscellanies,  p.  11.) 

3  As  specimens  of  Philo's  allegorizing  we  note  the  following  :  "By  the 
green  herb  of  the  field  Moses  means  that  portion  of  the  mind  which  is 
perceptible  only  by  the  intellect"  (Works,  I.  57).  "  He  means  by  Abra- 
ham's country  the  body,  and  by  his  kindred  the  outward  senses,  and  by 
his  father's  house  uttered  speech  "  (II.  44).     "  By  his  saying  of  Ishmael, 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  23 

Like  Other  Jewish  schools  of  the  age,  the  Alexandrian 
regarded  the  Scriptures  as  an  out  and  out  communication 
from  God,  and  took  practically  no  account  of  the  condi- 
tioning agency  of  the  human  recipients  of  the  revelation. 
<*The  prophet,"  says  Philo,  *'even  when  he  appears  to  be 
speaking,  is  silent,  and  another  being  is  employing  his 
vocal  organs,  his  mouth  and  tongue,  for  the  explanation 
of  what  things  he  chooses."  ^ 

In  the  Alexandrian  conception  of  God  and  of  His  re- 
lation to  the  world  a  tinge  of  transcendentaUsm  and  dual- 
ism may  be  noticed.  God  is  represented  as  exalted  in 
the  mystery  of  His  being  far  above  man's  power  of 
insight,  so  as  to  be  incapable  of  being  defined  in  any 
positive  manner.  While  His  presence  in  the  world  of 
sense  is  not  denied,  statements  are  made  which  imply  a 
feeling  that  the  world  is  not  worthy  of  immediate  contact 
with  God.  If  we  may  judge  from  the  trend  of  reference 
both  in  the  Book  of  Wisdom  and  in  the  writings  of  Philo, 


'  His  hand  shall  be  against  every  man,  and  every  man's  hand  against 
him,'  he  means  to  describe  the  design  and  plan  of  life  of  a  sophist,  who 
professes  an  over-curious  scepticism,  and  who  rejoices  in  disputatious 
arguments"  (II.  237).  "The  five  cities  of  the  land  of  Sodom  are  a 
figurative  representation  of  the  five  outward  senses  which  exist  in  us." 
(II.  426).  "The  same  relation,  then,  that  a  mistress  has  to  her  hand- 
maidens, or  a  wife,  who  is  a  citizen,  to  a  concubine,  that  same  relation 
has  virtue,  that  is  Sarah,  to  education,  that  is  Hagar"  (II.  162-7).  "It 
is  not  without  a  particular  and  correct  meaning  that  Joseph  is  said  to 
have  had  a  coat  of  many  colors,  for  a  political  constitution  is  a  many-colored 
and  a  multiform  thing,  admitting  of  an  infinite  variety  of  changes  in  its 
general  appearance,  in  its  affairs,  in  its  moving  causes,  in  the  peculiar 
laws  respecting  strangers,  in  numberless  differences  respecting  times 
and  places  "  (II.  460). 

1  On  Who  is  the  Heir  of  Divine  Things,  liii.     Works,  II.  147. 


24  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

God  is  not  conceived  to  be  altogether  responsible  for  the 
sphere  of  material  being.  He  is  represented  as  creating 
only  its  form,  not  its  substance.  The  initial  act  in  the 
process  of  creation  is  described  as  the  reduction  to  order 
of  a  formless  matter.^ 

To  provide  for  relating  God  to  the  world  thus  con- 
ceived to  be  scarcely  worthy  of  His  presence,  the  Alex- 
andrian theology  made  much  account  of  an  intermediate 
agent,  a  kind  of  vicegerent  of  the  Most  High  in  the 
visible  universe.  This  agent  is  described  in  the  Book  of 
Wisdom  under  the  name  of  "Wisdom,"  and  is  repre- 
sented as  "all-surveying,"  "pervading  and  penetrating 
all  things,"  "a  breath  of  the  power  of  God,"  *'a  clear 
effluence  of  the  glory  of  the  Almighty,"  "  an  effulgence 
from  everlasting  light,"  "  an  unspotted  mirror  of  the 
working  of  God,"  and  "an  image  of  His  goodness."  ^  In 
the  writings  of  Philo  the  favorite  term  for  designating 
the  agent  of  mediation  is  the  Logos,  a  term  which,  as 
used  by  him,  embraces  the  gist  of  the  Platonic  doctrine 
of  ideas  and  of  the  Stoic  doctrine  of  an  immanent  reason 
in  the  world.  It  is  the  reason  of  God  viewed  as  taking 
a  world  ward  direction.  As  such  it  is  the  image  of  God, 
the  archetype  of  the  world,  the  instrument  for  fashioning 
all  things,  the  dividing  and  arranging  power  in  the  uni- 
verse and  the  bond  of  union  therein.  While  an  inter- 
cessory function  in  behalf  of  men  is  not  denied  to  this 
image  and  instrument  of  the  Divine  Being,  it  is  in  general 
pictured  by  Philo  in  its  cosmic  relations.     To  predicate 

1  Wisdom,  xi.  17;  Philo,  The  Planting  of  Noah,  i.  Works,  I.  416. 
Compare  James  Drummond,  Philo  Judaeus,  I.  188,  299-301. 

2  Book  of  Wisdom,  vii.  22-30. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  25 

an  incarnation  of  the  Logos  after  the  pattern  of  the 
Christian  conception  was  entirely  foreign  to  his  point  of 
view.^ 

In  the  circle  of  Alexandrianism  the  Messianic  expec- 
tation seems  to  have  been  of  the  palest  kind.  Philo,  in 
common  with  his  co-religionists,  looked  forward  to  a 
time  when  the  scattered  Israelites  should  be  gathered 
into  their  own  land,  and  the  race  at  large,  won  to  right- 
eousness, should  enjoy  the  blessings  of  peace  and  plenty. 
In  this  sense  he  believed  in  a  Messianic  kingdom.  But 
if  by  a  Messianic  hope  one  means  the  centering  of  expec- 
tation upon  the  appearance  of  a  glorious  and  ideal  per- 
sonage bearing  a  special  divine  commission,  and  destined 
to  work  with  marvellous  efficiency  as  the  visible  leader 
and  king  of  God's  people,  then  it  must  be  said  that  the 
writings  of  Philo  do  not  show  any  proper  trace  of  a 
Messianic  hope.  As  Drummond  remarks,  ''  Philo  pre- 
ferred moving  in  the  region  of  abstract  ideas,  where  there 
is  more  elevation  of  thought  than  warmth  of  personal 
affection."  ^  The  cosmic  Logos  rather  than  the  personal 
Messiah  was  before  his  mind.  It  cannot  be  seen  that 
he  in  anywise  connected  the  former  with  the  common 
Jewish  conception  of  the  latter. 

Among  the  features  of  the  Alexandrian  anthropology 
which  show  the  influence  of  Hellenic  thinking  the  doc- 
trine of  the  preexistence  of  souls  and  a  disparaging  esti- 
mate of  the  body  as  a  clog  or  fetter  to  the  spirit  may  be 
mentioned.  The  former  is  intimated  in  the  Book  of 
Wisdom  in  the  representation  of  the  writer  (who  assumes 

1  Compare  Sheldon,  History  of  Christian  Doctrine,  I.  67-70. 

2  Philo  Judaeus,  II.  322. 


26  .NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  role  of  Solomon)  that,  being  a  good  soul,  he  had  the 
privilege  of  coming  into  an  undefiled  body.^  Philo's 
teaching  is  quite  as  distinctly  on  the  side  of  preexistence. 
<'A11  the  wise  men,"  he  says,  "mentioned  in  the  books 
of  Moses  are  represented  as  sojourners,  for  their  souls 
are  sent  down  upon  earth  as  to  a  colony."^  This  view 
appears  not  to  have  been  confined  to  the  Alexandrian 
school.  Notwithstanding  the  utter  lack  of  warrant  for 
the  notion  of  preexistence  of  souls  in  the  Old  Testament, 
later  Jewish  thought  as  embodied  in  the  Talmud  leaned 
decidedly  to  that  notion.^  With  Philo  the  idea  of  ema- 
nation seems  to  have  been  conjoined  with  that  of  pre- 
existence. "  Every  man,"  he  says,  "  in  regard  to  his 
intellect  is  connected  with  divine  reason,  being  an  im- 
pression of,  or  a  fragment  or  a  ray  of  that  blessed  nature."  ^ 
We  find  also  with  Philo  the  distinction  between  the 
generic  man  and  the  concrete  man.  The  former  was 
antecedent  to  the  latter,  perfectly  immaterial,  neither 
male  nor  female,  the  heavenly  archetypal  man.^  As 
regards  the  other  feature  of  the  Alexandrian  anthropology, 
the  slighting  estimate  of  the  body,  it  was  sufficiently 
pronounced  to  serve  naturally  as  a  basis  for  Gnostic 
asceticism.  The  sensuous  nature  may  not  indeed  have 
been  formally  denounced  as  intrinsically  evil.^  Still  the 
body  was  characterized  as  an  undesirable  incumbrance, 

1  Book  of  Wisdom,  viii.  19,  20. 

2  Confusion  of  Languages,  xvii.    Works,  II.  17. 
^Weber,  Jiidische  Theologie,  §46. 

4  Creation  of  the  World,  li.     Works,  I.  43,  264. 

5  Creation  of  the  World,  xlvi ;  Allegories  of  the  Sacred  Laws,  I.  xiL 
Works,  I,  39,  60. 

^  See  Drummond,  II,  297-301. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  27 

a  hindrance  to  the  true  Ufe  of  the  soul.  "  It  is  not 
possible,"  says  Philo,  "for  one  who  dwells  in  the  body 
and  belongs  to  the  race  of  mortals  to  be  united  to  God, 
but  he  alone  can  be  so  whom  God  delivers  from  that 
prison  house  of  the  body."^ 

Both  the  lack  of  a  vivid  Messianic  hope  on  the  part  of 
the  Alexandrian  school  and  its  disparaging  estimate  of 
the  body  naturally  affected  its  eschatology.  The  idea 
of  a  great  crisis,  to  be  inaugurated  and  led  on  to  its  con- 
summation by  the  Messianic  king  and  judge,  passed  out  of 
view.  The  thought  of  a  bodily  resurrection,  as  also  that 
of  a  great  physical  catastrophe,  was  ignored  or  discoun- 
tenanced. In  place  of  the  concrete  representations 
which  ruled  the  central  current  of  Jewish  belief  and  ex- 
pectation, the  Alexandrian  school  presents  us  with  the 
general  notion  of  an  immortal  life  of  disembodied  souls. 

In  considering  the  influence  of  the  Alexandrian  theol- 
ogy upon  the  New  Testament  writings  it  behooves  us  to 
remember  that  parallelisms  almost  always  can  be  found 
in  writings  which  belong  to  the  same  general  class,  ethi- 
cal, speculative,  or  mystical,  and  that  accordingly  they 
do  not  prove  the  fact  of  borrowing  except  on  the  score 
of  being  very  specific  in  character  or  extraordinary  in 
measure.  On  account  of  the  wide  range  of  Philo's  writ- 
ings it  might  be  expected  that  some  points  of  resem- 
blance could  be  pointed  out  between  them  and  any 
Christian  book  belonging  approximately  to  the  same  age. 
With  or  without  a  basis  in  actual  historical  connections, 
resembling  items  were  bound  to  appear.     In  fact  they 

1  Allegories  of  the  Sacred  Laws,  III.  xv.  Works,  I.  118.  Compare 
I.  80,  92,  125,  II.  208,  209. 


28  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

have  been  discovered  in  writings  as  remote  in  spirit  from 
the  speculative  and  mystical  system  of  Philo  as  are  the 
Synoptical  Gospels  and  the  Epistle  of  James.^ 

The  New  Testament  books  in  connection  with  which 
the  question  of  Alexandrian  influence  is  most  appropri- 
ately raised  are  undoubtedly  the  Epistles  of  Paul,  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  and  the  Johannine  books.  As 
respects  the  first,  it  is  generally  conceded  that  their  his- 
toric background  was  formed  more  largely  by  Pharisaic 
Judaism  than  by  Alexandrianism.  It  is  also  admitted, 
if  not  so  generally,  still  by  eminent  critics,  that  there  is 
no  decisive  evidence  that  Paul  had  access  to  the  chief 
despository  of  Alexandrianism  in  the  writings  of  his 
older  contemporary,  Philo.  From  this  point  of  view  it 
is  natural  to  conjecture  that,  if  the  apostle  actually  came 
into  contact  with  Alexandrian  thinking,  so  far  as  this 
was  not  consummated  through  personal  communication 
with  Apollos  and  men  of  his  stamp,  it  was  brought  about 
largely  through  the  Book  of  Wisdom.  Pfleiderer  decides 
very  confidently  both  for  the  fact  of  such  contact  and 
for  its  effectuation  in  particular  through  this  writing. 
He  considers  it  to  be  of  great  historic  significance  that 
the  elements  at  once  of  Pharisaic  Judaism  and  Hellenic 
thinking  should  have  had  place  in  Paul's  mind,  this  com- 
bination having  afforded  a  natural  means  of  transition  to 
a  system  at  once  transcending  the  particularism  of 
Judaism  and  offering  a  needful  complement  or  corrective 
to  Hellenism.  In  his  view  the  influence  of  the  Book  of 
Wisdom  may  be  discerned  in  a  number  of  Pauline  partic- 
ulars.    It  may  be  seen  in  the  description  of  the  natural 

1  Siegfried,  Philo  von  Alexandria,  pp.  310-317. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  29 

man  as  incompetent  to  receive  divine  verities  ^ ;  in  the 
judgment  passed  upon  the  Gentile  world,  partly  indul- 
gent and  partly  severe  ;  ^  in  the  thought  of  the  continued 
existence  of  the  soul  in  a  heavenly  dwelling,  which 
thought  in  2  Cor.  v.  i.  ff.  takes  the  place  of  a  bodily 
resurrection;^  and  in  sentences  bearing  on  the  subject 
of  predestination.*  As  to  the  merit  of  this  contention, 
we  see  nothing  in  the  way  of  the  probability  that  Paul 
was  acquainted  with  the  Book  of  Wisdom.  At  the  same 
time,  when  we  measure  the  active  and  fertile  mind  of 
Paul  against  the  mind  of  the  unknown  Alexandrian,  and 
note  that  the  passages  from  the  two  which  are  brought 
into  comparison  show  only  a  vague  and  general  resem- 
blance to  each  other,  we  are  far  from  sharing  the  impres- 
sion of  Pfieiderer  as  to  the  distinct  obligations  of  Paul 
to  the  Book  of  Wisdom.  It  may  have  been  a  factor  in 
Paul's  mental  furnishing,  but  we  do  not  find  sufficient 
evidence  for  concluding  that  it  was  a  prominent  factor. 

In  the  exegesis  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  an  occa- 
sional sentence  may  undoubtedly  be  found  which  smacks 
of  post-exilian  methods  of  interpretation.  It  is  not  clear, 
however,  that  herein  Paul  was  following  the  Alexandrian 
school  rather  than  the  Pharisaic  or  rabbinic.  His  singu- 
lar rendering  of  the  promise  to  Abraham's  seed  (Gal.  iii. 
16)  was  not  without  parallel  in  the  custom  of  the  latter 
school  to  extract  special  meanings  from  single  words. 

1  Wisd.  ix.  13-17,  I  Cor.  ii.  6-16. 

2  Wisd.  xiii.  1-9,  xiv,  21-28,  Rom.  i.  18  ff.,  i  Cor.  xu.  2,  Gal.  iv.  8  £f. 
^Wisd.  ix.  15. 

*  Wisd.  XV.  7,  xii.  10-12.  See  Otto  Pfieiderer,  Das  Urchristenthum, 
pp.  161,  162,  305,  edit,  of  1887. 


30  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

There  was  also,  as  has  been  noticed,  a  warrant  in  Phari- 
saic custom  for  allegorizing.  That  Paul  was  not  borrow- 
ing specifically  from  Alexandrianism  in  the  instances  of 
allegorical  interpretation  to  which  he  resorted  may  be 
regarded  as  intimated  by  the  fact  that  the  mystical  sense 
which  he  attached  to  Old  Testament  characters  and  in- 
cidents is  quite  different  from  that  assigned  to  them  by 
Philo.  For  example,  while  Paul  (Gal.  iv.  22-31)  con- 
strues Hagar  and  Sarah  as  emblematic  respectively  of 
the  state  of  legal  bondage  and  of  evangelical  freedom, 
Philo  makes  them  typical  respectively  of  education  and 
of  virtue.^ 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some  that  in  the  Pauline 
anthropology  the  influence  of  Alexandrian  teaching  is 
discernible.  Especially  has  this  alleged  influence  been 
discovered  in  the  strong  antithesis  between  flesh  and 
spirit  which  is  drawn  by  the  apostle.  His  language,  it  is 
claimed,  is  in  the  line  of  the  Hellenic  dualism  which  was 
appropriated  by  Philo.  But  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  Paul, 
unlike  Philo  and  the  Greeks,  is  on  record  as  a  believer 
in  the  resurrection,  that  is,  in  the  perpetuity  of  embodied 
existence,  and  that  in  one  connection  or  another  he 
spoke  of  the  body,  or  more  specifically  of  the  flesh  itself, 
as  a  subject  of  possible  sanctification.  These  facts  show 
at  least  that  he  was  not  clearly  and  consistently  com- 
mitted to  the  platform  of  Hellenic  or  Alexandrian  dualism, 
and  afford  ground  for  the  suspicion  that  his  disparaging 
references  to  the  flesh  are  not  to  be  taken  in  the  proper 
sense  of  that  dualism.     This  order  of  references,  it  must 

iQn  Seeking  Instruction,  ii.,  iii.     Works,  II.  158-160. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  31 

be  granted,  is  not  in  the  vein  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures. 
But  then  Paul  may  have  found  the  principal  incentive  to 
them  in  experience  and  observation  rather  than  in  the 
maxims  of  Hellenic  philosophy  on  the  incompatibility  of 
the  body  with  the  higher  life  of  man.  It  is  certain  to 
our  mind  that  the  latter  source  did  not  control  his  think- 
ing; that  to  some  extent  it  may  have  tinged  his  thought, 
an:!  especially  his  speech,  can  be  admitted. 

On  the  subject  of  christology  it  is  particularly  the 
contents  of  the  epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  the  Ephe- 
sians  that  have  given  rise  to  the  surmise  that  Paul  was 
influenced  by  the  Alexandrian  theology.  It  is  true  that 
in  these  epistles  Christ,  as  the  Son  of  God,  is  depicted  as 
holding  a  general  cosmic  relation,  and  that  He  is  styled 
the  image  of  the  invisible  God  and  the  first-born  of  the 
creation  —  representations  which  have  their  parallel  in 
Philo's  characterization  of  the  Logos.  But  it  is  to  be 
noticed,  on  the  other  hand,  that  these  christological  items 
had  been  touched  upon  in  the  earlier  epistles  of  Paul,^ 
and  that  he  was  only  fulfilling  the  existing  occasion  to 
combat  an  incipient  Gnosticism  if  he  gave  them  in  the 
later  instance  a  special  emphasis.  These  facts  legitimate 
the  conclusion  that  he  was  not  diverted  from  his  earlier 
standpoint  in  christology  by  Alexandrian  influence.  There 
remains,  of  course,  the  possibility  of  contending  that  his 
earlier  standpoint  was  itself  indebted  to  this  influence. 
It  must,  however,  be  acknowledged  that  the  further  back 
a  point  of  view  can  be  traced  in  the  mental  vision  of  the 
converted  Pharisee,  the  less  likelihood  is  there  that  it  was 

1 1  Cor.  viii.  6  ;  2  Cor.  iv.  4  ;   Rom.  viii.  29. 


32 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


furnished  in  whole  or  in  part  by  a  contemporary,  or  even 
by  a  predecessor,  belonging  to  the  Alexandrian  school. 
Having  said  this  much  against  giving  too  large  a  credit 
for  Paul's  christology  to  the  Alexandrian  speculation,  we 
admit  the  possibility  that  in  respect  of  form  something 
may  have  come  to  the  apostle  from  this  storehouse. 

Whatever  may  be  the  verdict  respecting  the  indebted- 
ness of  the  Pauline  epistles,  it  cannot  reasonably  be  dis- 
puted that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  exhibits  distinct 
obligations  to  Alexandrianism.  The  conclusion  is  un- 
avoidable that  the  mind  of  the  writer  had  been  well 
furnished  with  its  characteristic  thoughts  and  forms  of 
expression  before  he  undertook  the  task  of  Christian 
authorship.  In  the  opening  passage  of  the  epistle  there 
are  phrases  which  remind  of  the  description  of  wisdom 
in  the  Book  of  Wisdom  and  of  the  exposition  of  the 
Logos  in  the  writings  of  Philo.  The  way  in  which  the 
epistle  introduces  citations  from  the  Scriptures,  as  being 
the  words  of  God  rather  than  the  language  of  such  and 
such  a  sacred  writer,  corresponds  to  the  custom  of  Philo. 
The  typology  with  which  the  spirited  composition  is  so 
largely  occupied  is  quite  in  the  Alexandrian  vein,  the 
author  conceiving  of  the  Old  Testament  institutions  not 
merely  as  shadows  or  types  of  realities  brought  to  view 
in  a  later  and  more  perfect  dispensation,  but  as  copies  of 
patterns  preexisting  in  heaven.  Several  individual  items 
in  the  epistle  have  very  distinct  parallels  in  the  Alexan- 
drian literature.  Thus  the  representation  that  God  made 
oath  to  Abraham  by  Himself  because  he  could  not  swear 
by  a  greater  is  found  in  Philo,^  as  is  also  the  character- 

1  Allegories  of  the  Sacred  Laws,  III.  Ixxii.     Works,  I.  i6i. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  33 

ization  of  Melchizedek  as  king  of  peace  and  righteousness 
and  unconnected  with  father  or  mother.^  The  phrase 
"a  great  high-priest  "  is  found  in  the  epistle  and  in  Philo 
ahke.  Both  exceed  in  Uke  manner  the  distinct  warrant 
of  the  Old  Testament  in  representing  the  high-priest  as 
daily  offering  sacrifice.  Both  speak  of  Moses  as  *'  faith- 
ful in  all  his  house."  ^  In  short  the  evidences  of  the 
influence  of  the  Alexandrian  writings  upon  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  are  unmistakable. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  to  be  overlooked  that 
there  are  wide  contrasts  between  the  two.  The  author 
of  the  epistle  keeps  closer  in  general  than  did  Philo  to  a 
biblical  basis,  and  avoids  the  fanciful  extreme  in  allego- 
rizing to  which  a  speculative  temper  enticed  his  prede- 
cessor. The  representation  of  the  former  respecting  the 
incarnation  of  the  preexisting  Son,  His  partaking  of  flesh 
and  blood  and  His  thorough  identification  with  man  in 
lot  and  experience,  is  entirely  alien  to  Philo's  conception 
of  the  Logos.  Scarcely  less  remote  from  that  conception 
is  the  stanch  view  taught  in  the  epistle  respecting  the 
atoning  sacrifice  of  the  Mediator.  In  truth,  it  can  be 
said  that  theAlexandrianism  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
pertains  more  largely  to  the  domain  of  color  and  form 
than  to  that  of  dogmatic  substance. 

As  respects  the  Johannine  writings  —  that  is,  the 
fourth  Gospel  and  the  epistles  of  John  —  criticism  com- 
monly affirms  a  certain  affiliation  with  the  Alexandrian 

1  Allegories  of  the  Sacred  Laws,  III.  xxv.,  xxvi.     Works,  1. 128,  129. 

2  See  other  items  as  cited  by  Siegfried,  Philo  von  Alexandria,  pp. 
321-330 ;  also  by  Menegoz,  La  Theologie  de  I'Epitre  aux  Hebreux,  pp. 
187-217. 


34 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


literature.  In  the  prologue  to  the  Gospel  the  author 
gives  evidence  of  acquaintance,  direct  or  indirect,  with 
the  Logos  doctrine  of  Philo.  The  conclusiveness  of  the 
argument  for  a  direct  acquaintance  can  be  called  in  ques- 
tion ;  still  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  writer,  whoever 
he  may  have  been,  taking  up  his  pen  forty  or  fifty  years 
after  the  works  of  Philo  had  been  completed,  in  a  time 
when  a  bent  to  speculative  and  constructive  thought  had 
begun  to  manifest  itself  in  the  circle  of  Christianity, 
should  have  looked  into  the  writings  of  the  celebrated 
Alexandrian.  Another  point  of  comparison  with  the 
Alexandrian  literature  is  discoverable  in  the  predilection 
shown  in  the  Johannine  books  for  a  typical  sense  in  the 
forms  and  events  of  sacred  history.  A  still  further  point 
of  comparison  may  be  noted  in  the  antithesis  which  is 
drawn  between  the  world,  this  present  sphere  of  time 
and  sense,  and  the  realm  of  invisible  and  eternal  realities. 
In  some  instances  the  Johannine  characterization  of  the 
world  is  verbally  as  disparaging  as  that  which  is  given 
forth  in  the  dualistic  representations  of  Philo.^ 

Too  much  account,  however,  is  not  to  be  taken  of  any 
one  of  these  resembling  features.  The  Johannine  Logos, 
while  conceived  in  His  preexistence  and  general  world- 
relation  somewhat  after  the  fashion  of  Philo,  is  assigned 
to  relations  and  experiences  altogether  foreign  to  the 
Philonian  view.  The  Johannine  typology,  while  exhibiting 
a  leaning  to  mysticism  akin  to  that  of  Philo,  does  not 

1  Philo  says,  "  It  is  as  impossible  that  the  love  of  the  world  can  co- 
exist with  the  love  of  God,  as  for  light  and  darkness  to  coexist  at  the 
same  time  with  one  another"  (Fragment,  Works,  IV.  244).  John  says, 
"  If  any  man  love  the  world  the  love  of  the  Father  is  not  in  him"  (i  John 
ii.  15)- 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  35 

cover  the  same  range  as  the  Alexandrian.  The  latter 
makes  much  account  of  the  patterns  or  archetypes  of 
things  preexisting  in  a  divine  or  celestial  sphere.  The 
former,  omitting  this  distinctive  feature,  contemplates  the 
events  of  sacred  history  and  the  facts  and  relations  of 
nature  as  means  of  shadowing  forth  the  spiritual  truths 
of  the  new  dispensation.  Finally,  the  apparent  dualism 
between  the  two  worlds  seems,  when  the  total  references 
of  the  Johannine  writings  are  taken  into  account,  to  differ 
from  the  Philonian,  as  depicting  not  so  much  an  essential 
opposition  as  a  contrast  of  actual  ethical  condition. ^ 

We  conclude,  therefore,  that  while  the  Johannine  type 
reflects  in  a  measure  the  Alexandrian,  there  is  no  good 
reason  to  suppose  such  a  fusion  of  the  substance  of  the 
latter  into  the  former  as  some  writers  have  assumed. 
The  degree  of  dependence  shown  by  the  fourth  Gospel 

1  For  further  points  of  a  possible  comparison  see  Siegfried,  Philo  von 
Alexandria,  pp.  317-321;  also  Grill,  Untersuchungen  iiber  die  Ent- 
stehung  des  vierten  Evangeliums,  pp.  106-138.  The  list  of  resemblances 
between  the  Johannine  and  the  Philonian  sentences,  as  presented  by 
these  writers,  is  at  first  sight  quite  impressive ;  but,  as  Drummond  re- 
marks, a  scrutiny  of  the  parallels  brings  to  view  marked  differences  in 
style  and  phraseology,  as  well  as  striking  contrasts  in  thought.  In  re- 
spect of  vocabulary  John  seems  to  have  been  influenced  by  Philo  in  a 
very  scanty  measure.  "  Philo  is  fond  of  compounds  with  8v<s-,  having 
twenty-eight  words  of  this  kind  ;  the  fourth  Gospel  has  none.  Philo  has 
forty  compounds  with  ev- ;  the  Gospel  has  only  two  common  words. 
Philo  has  seventy-three  compounds  with  e>c-,  not  one  of  which  is  in  the 
Gospel,  though  the  latter  has  fourteen  such  compounds,  nearly  all  very 
common  words.  Philo  has  sixty-seven  compounds  with  Itti-  which  are 
not  in  the  Gospel,  the  Gospel  having  eleven  ordinary  words."  (James 
Drummond,  article  "  Philo,"  in  Hastings'  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  v.  207,  208.) 
So  far  then  as  the  evidence  of  vocabulary  goes,  there  is  reason  to  con- 
clude against  the  supposition  of  any  protracted  and  absorbing  study  of 
Philo's  writings  by  the  author  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 


36  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

upon  the  school  of  Alexandria  is  less  than  that  revealed 
by  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 

IV.  —  Questions  as  to  the    Indebtedness  of  Cer- 
tain Special  Portions  of  the  New  Testament 
TO  Post-Canonical  Judaism. 

The  foremost  questions  respecting  the  influence  of 
post-canonical  developments  upon  the  New  Testament 
literature  have  now  been  considered.  But  some  points 
relating  to  individual  books  and  passages  deserve  a  few 
additional  words.  The  extent  to  which  Pharisaism  sup- 
plied, or  anticipated,  the  framework  of  the  ordinary  New 
Testament  eschatology  involves  evidently  a  measure  of 
indebtedness  on  the  part  of  the  Apocalypse  to  post- 
canonical  Judaism,  Beyond  this  general  indebtedness  it 
is  supposed  by  some  critics  that  this  book  was  influenced 
by  specific  specimens  of  apocalyptic  literature  which  came 
forth  in  later  Judaism. 

In  the  Epistle  of  James  a  close  mental  association  with 
the  "  wisdom  literature  "  has  been  detected.  It  has  been 
claimed  also  that  the  epistle  shows  a  closer  affiliation 
with  the  Hellenistic  literature  of  this  order  than  with  the 
Hebrew.  Some  have  thought  that  the  language  and 
ideas  of  James  bear  evident  traces  of  the  maxims  of 
Ecclesiasticus.  A  comparison,  however,  of  the  two 
writings  does  not  reveal  any  such  detailed  resemblance 
as  to  make  it  appropriate  to  emphasize  very  strongly  the 
dependence  of  the  epistle.^ 

1  In  particular  compare  James  i.  2  with  Ecclesiasticus  ii.  1-6 ;  i.  27 
with  iv.  10;  i.  19,  ii.  14-26  with  iv.  29;  iii.  2  with  v.  13;  i.  12-15  with 
XV.  11-20;  ii.  13  with  xxviii.  i,  2;  iii.  5-8  with  xxviii.  13-26;  v.  2,  3 
with  xxix.  10. 


THE  QUESTION  OF  SOURCES  37 

In  proportion  to  its  length,  the  Epistle  of  Jude  is 
especially  distinguished  by  borrowing  post-canonical 
matter.  Not  only  does  it  cite  directly  from  the  so-called 
Book  of  Enoch,  but  it  also  introduces  a  legendary  account 
of  a  contest  between  the  archangel  Michael  and  the  devil 
over  the  body  of  Moses.  In  2  Tim.  iii.  8  we  have  simi- 
larly, in  the  names  given  to  the  Egyptian  sorcerers,  an 
item  which  has  no  ground  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  It 
has  the  appearance  of  being  a  traditionary  addition  to 
history.  The  peculiar  reference  in  i  Cor.  x.  4  to  a  rock 
that  followed  the  Israelites  in  the  wilderness  has  its 
counterpart  in  the  rabbinic  notion  of  a  literal  rock  that 
mercifully  kept  along  with  the  host  in  the  wilderness  and 
refreshed  it  with  the  stream  that  gushed  from  its  side. 
It  is  not  impossible  that  Paul  had  this  notion  in  mind 
when  he  referred  to  the  rock  as  Christ.  At  any  rate  it 
is  difficult  to  surmise  what  should  have  prompted  him 
to  introduce  the  figure  of  a  moving  rock,  were  not  that 
figure  already  at  hand  in  the  traditionary  representation. 
Little  account,  however,  is  to  i3e  made  of  this  item,  since 
Paul  gives  no  sanction  to  the  tradition,  and  seems  to 
bring  it  in  only  by  way  of  literary  device  to  emphasize 
the  function  of  Christ  in  ancient  Israel.  Once  more, 
reference  may  be  made  to  i  Cor.  xi.  10  where  Paul  in- 
stances a  consideration  of  the  angels  as  a  reason  for  the 
veiling  of  women.  The  supposition  of  some  commenta- 
tors is  that  the  apostle  was  thinking  of  Gen.  vi.  2,  and 
considered  the  incident  there  recorded  as  implying  that 
it  is  a  matter  of  prudence  for  women  to  cover  up  their 
beauty  from  the  gaze  of  angels.  On  the  side  of  this 
supposition  is  the  indubitable  fact  that  in  a  widely  cur- 


38  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

rent  interpretation  Gen.  vi.  2  was  understood  to  teach 
that  the  daughters  of  men  became  a  source  of  tempta- 
tion to  the  angels.^  It  should  not  be  overlooked,  how- 
ever, that  many  exegetes  have  preferred  to  find  a  different 
meaning  in  the  apostle's  reference.  No  more  should  it 
be  overlooked  that  the  natural  sense  of  Gen.  vi.  2  is  that 
which  Jewish  interpretation  near  the  beginning  of  the 
Christian  era  currently  attached  thereto,  and  that  accord- 
ingly the  appropriation  of  that  interpretation  would  not 
make  the  verse  in  Corinthians  an  instance  of  a  post- 
canonical  opinion  as  opposed  to  a  canonical. 

The  discussion  shows,  as  the  very  reason  of  the  case 
would  teach  one  to  anticipate,  that  Christianity  was  not 
isolated .  from  the  theological  thinking  of  contemporary 
Judaism.  Both  Pharisaism  and  Alexandrianism  supplied 
moulds  in  which  the  thought  of  one  or  another  New 
Testament  writer  was  cast,  not  to  say  influenced  the 
thinking  of  one  or  another  writer.  It  does  not  follow, 
however,  that  Christianity  did  not  have  in  general  a  dis- 
tinctly closer  affinity  with  the  higher  levels  of  Old  Tes- 
tament thought  than  with  the  cardinal  phases  of  the 
later  Judaism.  Neither  does  it  follow  that  Christianity 
was  not  profoundly  original.  The  contrary  must  be 
asserted  in  both  relations.  In  the  summit  of  Jewish 
prophecy,  as  recorded  in  the  canonical  Scriptures,  Chris- 
tianity had  its  most  congenial  antecedent.  In  spirit  and 
in  subject-matter  the  New  Testament  message  repre- 
sented an  immense  advance  beyond  the  plane  of  postcan- 
onical  Judaism,  though  the  latter,  by  the  inevitable  work- 
ing of  the  law  of  historical  connections,  has  left  its  traces. 

iBook  of  Enoch,  vi.,  vii.,  x.,  xii.,  xv.,  Ixix.;  Book  of  Jubilees,  iv,,  v., 
vii.,  X. ;  Apocalypse  of  Baruch,  Ivi. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  SYNOPTICAL  GOSPELS  AND  THEIR 
TEACHINGS 

I.  —  The  Characteristics  of   These   Gospels  and 

THE  More  Probable  Theory  as  to  Their 

Interrelations. 

An  exposition  of  New  Testament  Theology  properly 
begins  with  the  Synoptical  Gospels.  They  embody  the 
most  primitive  type  of  Christian  teaching.  As  compared 
with  the  fourth  Gospel  their  antecedent  position  will  not 
be  disputed.  They  were  earlier  in  point  of  actual  com- 
position, and  in  subject-matter  they  show  a  more  primi- 
tive cast.  The  fourth  Gospel  combines  a  large  measure 
of  theological  reflection  with  the  life-story  of  Christ.  In 
the  Synoptical  Gospels  the  element  of  theological  reflec- 
tion may  not  be  wanting,  but  it  is  certainly  less  conspicu- 
ous. Their  treatment  of  the  gospel  history  is  more 
objective  in  tone.  At  least,  their  general  agreement  in 
form  and  content,  as  opposed  to  the  singular  cast  of  the 
fourth  Gospel,  argues  for  the  relatively  objective  character 
of  their  representations.  In  the  absence  of  distinct 
evidence  to  the  contrary,  the  three  concurring  witnesses 
must  be  regarded  as  repeating  the  dominant  tradition  of 
their  time  respecting  the  sayings  and  doings  of  the 
Master.     If  we  ask  for  the  verdict  of  criticism  on  this 

39 


40  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

point,  it  is  given  with  entire  unanimity  for  the  conclusion 
that  the  fourth  Gospel  is  relatively  of  a  subjective  cast, 
and  approaches  less  closely  to  a  verbal  reproduction  of 
Christ's  discourses  than  do  the  Synoptical  Gospels. 

If  the  comparison  be  made  with  the  PauHne  epistles, 
it  must  be  granted  that  in  one  point  the  antecedent 
position  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  is  subject  to  denial.  It 
is  not  estabhshed  that  any  one  of  them  was  extant  in  its 
present  form  when  those  epistles  were  given  to  the 
Church.  But  the  mere  temporal  priority  of  the  epistles 
does  not  of  course  necessarily  bespeak  for  them  a  logical 
priority.  Christ  lived  and  taught  before  Paul  preached 
and  wrote.  Unless  then  the  Synoptical  Gospels  were 
dominated  by  Paul's  line  of  teaching  rather  than  by  the 
impression  coming  from  the  life  and  words  of  Christ, 
they  represent  the  prior  doctrinal  type.  Now  we  have 
no  hesitation  in  saying  that  it  is  quite  certain  that  in 
the  composition  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  the  Christ 
influence  was  decidedly  preponderant  over  the  Pauline 
influence.  The  latter  may  have  wrought  to  some  extent. 
Certainly  it  would  be  rash  to  affirm  that  neither  Mark 
nor  Luke  derived  anything  in  the  way  of  thought  or 
terminology  from  their  companionship  with  Paul.  On 
the  other  hand,  several  considerations  advise  against  mag- 
nifying the  apostle's  influence  on  the  composition  of  the 
Gospels.  In  the  first  place  it  is  to  be  noted  that  general 
affinities  with  Pauline  teaching  are  no  sufficient  proof  of 
borrowing  specifically  from  Paul.  No  one  has  ever 
proved  that  Christ  did  not  anticipate  in  important  respects 
the  essentials  of  Pauline  doctrine,  so  that  a  correct  report 
of  His  sayings  could  not  be  given  without  including  more 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  41 

or  less  of  the  distinctive  features  of  that  doctrine.  In 
the  second  place  it  is  to  be  observed  that  it  is  about  as 
easy  to  detect  Pauline  substance  in  one  Synoptical  Gos- 
pel as  in  another.  It  is  indeed  theoretically  conceivable 
that  all  the  evangelists  may  have  derived  a  strong  doctri- 
nal bias  from  the  apostolic  theologian.  But  will  any  one 
count  it  probable  that  Pauline  influence  should  have 
overmastered  the  primitive  evangelical  tradition  in  the 
mind  of  every  expositor  of  the  same  and  caused  in  every 
instance  an  interpolation  of  Pauline  dogmatics  at  the 
expense  of  the  original  type  ?  It  is  decidedly  improbable, 
and  the  fact  that  Paulinism  of  the  pronounced  type  of 
Galatians  and  Romans  appears  to  have  been  already  in 
the  sub-apostolic  age  well-nigh  out  of  the  field  of  vision 
is  right  in  line  with  this  improbability.  In  the  third 
place,  it  must  be  contended  that  the  unsophisticated 
reader  does  not  naturally  discover  a  specifically  Pauline 
coloring  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels.  He  fails  to  find  there 
a  single  sentence  that  recalls  the  technical  Pauline  ex- 
position of  the  theme  of  justification  and  reconciliation, 
or  the  peculiar  Pauline  manner  of  putting  the  antithesis 
between  law  method  and  gospel  method.  On  the  other 
hand,  he  is  forced  to  observe  how  the  distinctive  lines  of 
synoptical  representation  respecting  the  "Kingdom"  and 
the  '*Son  of  Man"  are  wanting  in  the  Pauline  epistles. 
Indeed,  he  cannot  escape  the  conviction  that  the  notes 
of  independence  in  the  Gospels  greatly  exceed  those  of 
dependence.^ 

lAs  to  any  alleged  influence  of  Pauline  thinking  on  the  historical 
substance  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels,  Somerville  well  remarks:  "That 
the  value  of  the  record  as  a  source  of  historic  truth  has  been  impaired  to 
any  extent  by  theological  bias  proceeding  from  the  school  of  Paul,  is 


42  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Of  the  three  Gospels,  it  is  generally  confessed,  the  first 
has  most  of  a  Judaic  impress.  In  various  relations  the 
Jewish  background  in  the  writer's  mind  is  made  to  appear. 
It  is  seen  especially  in  his  forwardness  to  exhibit  the 
unity  of  the  two  dispensations  by  specifying  how  the 
whole  line  of  events  in  the  one  is  prophetically  intimated 
in  the  other.^  It  is  seen  in  the  ease  with  which  he  slides 
into  the  use  of  the  Jewish  order  of  theocratic  terminology, 
as  when,  for  example,  he  speaks  of  Jerusalem  as  the  holy 
city,  or  styles  it  the  city  of  the  Great  King .2  It  is  seen, 
furthermore,  some  have  contended,  in  the  stress  which, 
in  a  given  connection,  is  laid  upon  the  fulfillment  of  the 
law  up  to  its  least  item,^  and  in  the  distinct  enunciation 
of  the  principle  that  every  man  is  to  fare  at  the  hands  of 
the  Judge  according  to  his  deeds.*  But  it  is  not  to  be 
overlooked  that  Matthew's  Gospel  has  an  offsetting  aspect. 
If,  on  the  one  hand,  it  shows  Jewish  coloring  to  a  special 
degree,  on  the  other  hand  it  does  not  fall  below  any  one 
of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  in  the  measure  in  which  it 
transcends  Jewish  provincialism  and  particularism.  It 
presents   many  glimpses  of  a  spiritual  and  world-wide 

what  scarcely  any  one  will  admit  who  feels  the  power  of  life  depicted  in 
the  Gospels.  The  harmony  of  the  character  of  Christ  as  there  deUneated, 
the  intermingling  of  the  divine  and  the  human  in  such  a  way  that  *  the 
lowly  and  human  never  degrade  Him  in  our  eyes,  nor  His  power  and 
greatness  remove  Him  out  of  our  sympathies  and  understanding,'  is  in- 
consistent with  the  supposition.  That  such  a  picture  was  or  could  have 
been  the  growth  of  unconscious  theologising  is  far  more  incredible  than 
that  it  is  what  it  professes  to  be,  the  record  of  a  sublime  reality."  (St. 
Paul's  Conception  of  Christ,  pp.  225,  226.) 

1  Matt.  i.  22,  23.  ii.  15,  17,  18,  13,  iv.  15,  16,  viii.  17,  xii.  17-21,  xiii.  14, 
15,  xxi.  4,  5,  xxvii.  9,  10. 

2  Matt,  iv.  5,  v.  35.  «v.  17-19-  *xvi.  27. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  43 

religion.  It  pictures  the  Gentile  world  in  the  person  of 
the  magi  as  first  recognizing  and  worshiping  the  Christ. ^ 
It  minifies  the  exclusive  advantages  of  race  connection 
by  recording  the  declaration  that  God  is  able  from  the 
stones  to  raise  up  children  unto  Abraham .^  It  pictures 
Christ  as  setting  forth  a  higher  rule  than  that  of  the 
olden  time,^  and  as  claiming  to  be  lord  over  such  a  sacred 
institution  as  the  Sabbath.*  It  bespeaks  tolerance  and 
consideration  for  new  elements  in  religion  by  protesting 
against  the  folly  of  putting  new  wine  into  old  wine-skins.^ 
It  represents  the  little  one  in  the  new  kingdom  as  greater 
than  the  most  stalwart  representative  of  the  old.^  In  ex- 
press terms  it  declares  that  many  shall  come  from  the 
east  and  the  west  to  occupy  a  place  in  the  kingdom  which 
Israelites  will  be  found  unworthy  to  occupy,"  and  that 
as  a  people  they  shall  be  dispossessed  of  the  Lord's  vine- 
yard and  see  it  let  out  to  other  husbandmen.^  It  records 
a  formal  injunction  for  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  not 
simply  within  Jewish  boundaries,  but  to  all  nations.^  So 
far  is  it  from  resting  m  a  mere  legal  plan  of  gaining 
divine  benefits  that  it  invites  to  the  confidence  that  the 
best  gifts  of  God  may  be  obtained  by  simply  asking  in 
the  spirit  of  childlike  faith  and  smcerity.^^  In  short,  it  is 
quite  plain  that,  whatever  inheritance  came  over  from 
Judaism  into  Matthew's  Gospel,  it  did  not  prevent  the 
distinctive  spirituality  and  universalism  of  Christianity 
from  gaining  emphatic  expression  therein.  It  is  possible, 
however,  that  the  intimacy  of  the  writer's  mental  associ- 

lii.  I,  2,  II.  ^ix.  17.  8xxi.  33-45. 

2iii.9.  ^xi.  II.  ^xxviii.  19. 

8v.  21-49.  ''yui.  II,  12.  lOvii.  7-1 1. 
4xii.8. 


44  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

at  ion  with  Judaism  may  in  part  account  for  the  fact  that 
this  Gospel  more  than  any  other  of  the  three  contem- 
plates Christianity  as  an  institution,  in  other  words,  gives 
more  place  to  the  churchly  element.  In  virtue  of  this 
characteristic  the  first  Gospel  supplied  a  congenial  basis 
for  the  early  Catholic  tendency  —  the  tendency  to  the 
unification  and  organization  of  Christian  society. 

In  Mark's  Gospel  a  special  dogmatic  interest  is  not 
prominent.  At  least,  such  interest  is  not  likely  to  be 
manifest  to  the  reader  who  has  not  decided  beforehand 
as  to  what  type  of  christology  is  historically  credible. 
The  writing  of  the  second  evangelist  is  essentially  a 
descriptive  Gospel.  Its  aim  is  a  vivid  reproduction  of 
the  life  of  Christ,  a  picture  of  the  Master  in  His  deeds. 
With  the  single  exception  of  the  prophetic  exposition  of 
the  "parousia"  it  introduces  no  lengthy  discourses.  In 
the  exercise  of  its  pictorial  art  it  passes  rapidly  from 
scene  to  scene,  giving  however  such  events  as  it  attempts 
to  delineate  with  about  as  much  detail  as  does  either  of 
the  companion  Gospels. 

As  compared  with  Matthew's  Gospel  that  of  Luke 
shows  less  of  Judaic  coloring.  The  writer  seems  either 
to  have  had  a  less  vital  reminiscence  of  Judaism,  or  else 
to  have  kept  it  purposely  in  abeyance  as  not  being  likely 
to  edify  the  Gentile  readers  whom  he  more  particularly 
contemplated.  It  cannot  be  said  that  he  pushes  Chris- 
tian universalism  beyond  the  point  of  view  of  Matthew ; 
for  the  latter,  as  has  been  noticed,  passes  well-nigh  to 
the  limit ;  but  his  universalism  is  more  largely  disengaged 
from  adjuncts  which    remind    of   Jewish   antecedents.^ 

1  For  examples  of  universalism  in  Luke  see  ii.  30-32,  iii.  8,  xiiL  29, 
xxiv.  47. 


THE   SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  45 

That  Luke,  as  a  disciple  of  the  free  spirited  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles,  naturally  gave  this  cast  to  his  composition 
need  not  be  denied.  At  the  same  time,  there  is  little 
occasion  to  find  in  his  Christian  universalism  a  specific 
token  of  his  Paulinism.  When  Luke  wrote,  Christian 
universalism  was  no  party  shibboleth.  With  inconsider- 
able exception  it  was  the  thoroughly  accepted  maxim  of 
the  community  of  believers.  As  a  special  trait  of  Luke 
we  may  notice  his  predilection  for  the  gracious  side  of 
Christ's  personality  and  teaching.  He  abridges  the  anti- 
Pharisaic  polemic,  and  adds  to  the  matter  furnished  by 
his  fellow  evangelists  not  a  little  that  is  illustrative  of 
divine  tenderness  and  compassion. 

As  to  order  of  composition,  criticism  may  be  said  to 
have  established  a  probability  in  favor  of  the  priority  of 
Mark's  Gospel  among  the  extant  records  of  the  life  of 
Christ.  In  the  first  place,  so  far  as  simplicity  is  a  token 
of  primitiveness,  this  Gospel  has  an  unequivocal  claim  to 
be  placed  first  in  the  list.  In  the  second  place,  it  is 
very  difficult  to  suppose  that  certain  narratives  contained 
in  the  other  Gospels  would  have  been  omitted  by  Mark 
had  they  been  before  him  in  written  form  at  the  time 
that  he  drew  up  his  history.  Doubtless  a  problem  re- 
mains in  respect  of  omitted  matters,  whatever  order  of 
composition  may  be  assumed ;  but  this  problem  is  more 
easily  dealt  with  on  the  supposition  of  the  priority  of 
Mark  than  on  the  opposing  hypothesis.  In  the  third 
place,  the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Luke  bear  distinct 
evidences  of  a  composite  character,  such  as  are  not  observ- 
able in  Mark.  Luke's  Gospel  begins  with  an  acknowl- 
edgment of  acquaintance  with  documentary  sources.    In 


46  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

line  with  this  acknowledgment  there  is  a  token  of  con- 
tact with  a  plurality  of  documents  in  the  occurrence  of 
a  considerable  number  of  doublets,  that  is,  repetitions  of 
the  same  or  closely  similar  sentences.  Among  the  sources 
which  contributed  to  Luke,  a  prominent  place  evidently 
belonged  to  Mark.  Thence  were  taken  almost  entirely 
the  contents  of  three  extensive  passages,  namely  iii.  i-vi. 
19,  viii.  4-ix.  50,  xviii.  1 5-xxiv.  10,  comprising  in  all  about 
eleven  chapters.  This  matter,  too,  is  given  very  largely 
in  Mark's  order.  Quite  as  distinctly  as  Luke's  Gospel 
that  of  Matthew  gives  evidence  of  a  composite  character. 
An  indication  of  a  plurality  of  sources  is  found  in  the 
number  of  doublets  which  the  latter  incorporates,  this 
number  being  quite  as  great  as  that  contained  in  Luke.^ 
A  further  indication  of  the  same  fact  is  discovered  by 
some  critics  in  the  union  which,  as  was  noticed  above, 
this  Gospel  exhibits  between  a  pronounced  affiliation 
with  Judaism  and  an  equally  pronounced  leaning  to 
Christian  universalism.  The  contrasted  features  are 
regarded  as  due  to  the  differing  standpoints  of  the  con- 
tributors. It  is  claimed  also  that  a  token  of  the  com- 
posite character  of  Matthew  appears  in  the  fact  that 
some  citations  from  the  Old  Testament  give  evidence  of 
reference  to  the  Septuagint  version,  while  others  show 
the  influence  of  the  Hebrew.  To  some  of  these  consid- 
erations, especially  the  second,  we  are  not  able  to  attach 
any  great  weight ;  but  when  taken  together,  and  sup- 

1  Compare  Matt.  x.  21  with  Matt.  x.  35  ;  xii.  31  with  xii.  32  ;  xiii.  12 
with  XXV.  29;  xvi.  4  with  xii.  39;  xvi.  24  with  x.  38;  xvi.  25  with  x.  39; 
xviii,  8  f.  with  x.  29  f. ;  xix.  9  with  v.  32 ;  xxi.  21  with  xvii.  20;  xxi.  22 
with  vii.  8 ;  xxiv.  23  with  xxiv.  26. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  47 

plemented  by  the  fact  of  the  superior  simplicity  and 
homogeneity  of  Mark's  Gospel,  they  certainly  favor  the 
conclusion  that  Matthew's  Gospel  is  to  be  esteemed  a 
composite  production,  and  as  such  having  had  in  Mark  a 
source  instead  of  serving  as  a  source  to  Mark.  That 
one  of  the  two  made  contribution  to  the  other  is  indi- 
cated by  approaches  to  identity  in  matter  and  phrase. 

While  the  Gospels  of  Luke  and  Matthew  incorporate 
the  larger  part  of  the  narratives  of  Mark,  they  appear  to 
have  originated  in  independence  of  one  another.  Several 
facts  point  to  this  conclusion.  The  number  of  narratives 
which  they  have  in  common  over  and  above  those  in 
Mark  is  small  compared  with  the  narratives  that  are 
special  to  each.  Though  they  agree  in  going  back  of 
the  story  of  the  second  evangelist  to  the  birth  and  in- 
fancy of  Jesus,  they  are  far  from  exhibiting  an  identical 
content  in  these  introductory  portions.  It  is  to  be 
noticed  also  that  they  differ  in  respect  of  the  order  in 
which  they  reproduce  the  matter  which  they  have  in 
common  with  Mark.  Moreover,  they  give  in  textual  or 
verbal  respects  different  renderings  of  this  matter,  such 
as  are  well  explained  on  the  supposition  that  each,  inde- 
pendently of  the  other,  worked  over  the  text  of  Mark. 
Specially  noticeable  variations  from  Mark's  dialect  do 
not  appear  to  have  passed  over  from  one  to  the  other. 

In  addition  to  finding  a  common  source  in  Mark's 
narratives,  it  is  believed  that  Matthew  and  Luke  drew 
in  common  from  a  collection  of  sayings,  or  discourses. 
The  two  evangelists  appear  to  have  incorporated  an 
identical  body  of  the  sayings  of  Christ,  giving  these  in 
some  instances  with  a  close  approach  to  verbal  identity, 


48  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

and  in  others  diverging  quite  appreciably  in  respect  of 
form.  In  individual  instances  a  fair  explanation  of  these 
facts  of  correspondence  might  be  found  in  the  suppo- 
sition that  one  of  the  Gospels  supplied  the  original  text, 
and  that  the  other  reproduced  this  with  more  or  less  free- 
dom. But  a  supposition  of  this  kind  collides  with  the 
evidence  along  various  lines  for  the  mutual  independence 
of  the  two  Gospels.  The  only  satisfactory  conclusion, 
therefore,  seems  to  be  that  the  resembling  discourses 
were  taken  from  a  source  no  longer  extant,  from  a  col- 
lection of  the  sayings  of  Christ  to  which  the  two  evange- 
lists independently  had  access.  The  first  evangelist  is 
estimated  to  have  derived  one-sixth  of  his  matter  from 
this  source,  and  the  third  nearly  as  large  a  proportion. 

A  reference  to  this  collection  —  which  is  suggested,  if 
not  established  as  an  historical  reality,  by  a  comparative 
study  of  the  Gospels  —  may  possibly  be  contained  in 
this  sentence  of  Papias  :  *'  Matthew  composed  the  'Logia' 
{tol  \6yia)  in  the  Hebrew  tongue,  and  every  one  trans- 
lated it  as  he  was  able."^  Appeal  may  be  made  to  the 
Septuagint,  to  the  New  Testament,  and  to  early  patristic 
usage  in  favor  of  understanding  by  the  *'  Logia  "  sayings 
or  discourses.  A  certain  support  is  thus  given  to  the 
inference  that  Papias  could  not  have  referred  to  the 
complete  Gospel  of  Matthew,  with  its  narrative  portions, 
but  rather  to  a  collection  of  discourses,  the  composition 
of  which  was  antecedent  to  the  Gospel  of  Matthew  as 
known  to  us.  We  are  warned,  however,  not  to  make  too 
much  of  the  significance  appropriate  to  the  term  **  Logia," 
since  we  find  that  Papias  himself  in  referring  to  Mark's 

1  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.  iii.  39. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  49 

Gospel  seems  to  have  included  the  record  both  of  the 
words  and  deeds  of  Christ  under  the  phrase  ol  fcvpcaKol 
Xojol}  The  ground  is  consequently  wanting  for  an 
adequate  assurance  that  in  referring  to  Matthew's  Logia 
he  did  not  intend  to  designate  the  complete  Gospel  as 
known  to  history .^  In  that  event  it  must  be  said  that 
he  was  mistaken  in  supposing  it  to  have  been  written 
primarily  in  Hebrew.  Criticism  does  not  grant  that  our 
Matthew  as  a  whole  could  have  been  a  translation  from 
Hebrew  into  Greek.  We  are  thus  left  without  any  in- 
disputable historic  testimony  for  connecting  the  Logia, 
as  a  collection  of  discourses,  with  the  Apostle  Matthew. 
The  actual  existence,  however,  of  the  supposed  collection 
of  sayings  is  not  made  improbable  by  the  uncertainty  of 
the  reference  of  Papias.  The  common  content  of  Mat- 
thew and  Luke  is  a  token  of  a  source,  other  than  Mark, 
to  which  both  Gospels  were  indebted  ;  while  the  lack  in 
them  of  a  common  content,  aside  from  that  supplied  by 
Mark,  in  their  narratives  of  Christ's  passion  and  resur- 
rection, is  a  sign  that  the  source  in  question  was  adapted 
to  furnish  sayings  rather  than  narratives  of  events. 

In  using  Mark's  Gospel  the  author  of  the  first  Gospel 
proceeded  in  some  instances  more  conservatively  than  did 
the  third  evangelist.  The  difference  in  this  respect,  how- 
ever, is  not  wide.  Both  used  the  earlier  narrative  of 
Christ's  life  with  a  freedom  which  implies  that,  while 
they  attached  to  it  a  high  value,  they  did  not  regard  it 
as  a  strictly  authoritative  rendering  of  the  Christian  tra- 

1  Eusebius,  iii.  39. 

2  Compare  Jiilicher,  Einleitung,  p.  239;  Lightfoot,  Essays  on  the 
Work  entitled  Supernatural  Religion,  pp.  175,  176. 


50  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

dition.  Matthew's  reproduction  of  the  ''Logia"  very 
Hkely  comes  nearer  to  the  original  text  than  does  Luke's  ; 
but  the  latter  offers  a  compensation  in  the  more  probable 
association  with  historical  situations  which  he  gives  to 
the  "Logia."  It  is  commonly  admitted  that  Matthew's 
Gospel  exhibits  considerable  freedom  in  massing  the  dis- 
courses of  Christ. 

It  is  quite  possible  that  the  composition  of  the  *'Logia" 
preceded  that  of  Mark's  Gospel.  Some  scholars  sup- 
pose that  there  is  sufficient  ground  for  concluding  that 
the  second  evangelist  made  use  of  that  source.  But, 
apart  from  the  eschatological  discourse  in  chapter  xiii, 
there  is  little  evidence  in  Mark  of  the  use  of  any  source 
that  assumed  to  report  the  words  of  Jesus.  The  borrow- 
ing from  the  "  Logia  "  remains  therefore  a  problematical 
point.  Still  more  open  to  question  is  the  theory  of  an 
original  Mark  (Ur-Marcus)  back  of  the  canonical.^  Ac- 
cording to  an  early  tradition,  Mark  depended  largely  in 
his  writing  upon  Peter's  testimony  2.  While  positive  proof 
is  wanting,  the  tradition  is  entirely  credible.  If,  then, 
we  suppose  the  "  Logia,"  as  is  eminently  probable,  to 
have  been  based  on  apostolic  reminiscence  and  testimony, 
we  must  recognize  an  apostolic  basis  as  underlying  the 
greater  part  of  the  whole  group  of  the  Synoptical  Gos- 
pels ;  for,  while  some  other  sources  made  contribution 
to  the  first  and  third  Gospels,  these  two  were  derived  in 
large  part  from  Mark  and  the  "  Logia."  ^ 

1  Jiilicher,  Einleitung,  pp.  256,  257  ;  Moffatt,  The  Historical  New 
Testament,  p.  264.  2  Eusebius,  iii.  39. 

3  For  convenient  summaries  of  the  evidence  bearing  on  the  interre- 
lation of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  see  Paul  Wernle,  Die  Synoptische  Frage; 
John  C.  Hawkins,  Horae  Synopticae ;  Harnack,  The  Sayings  of  Jesus; 
Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents,  Part  II. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING        51 

Means  for  determining  the  precise  date  of  any  one  of 
the  Gospels  are  wanting.  Harnack  concludes  that  Mark 
was  written  between  65  and  85  a.d.,  probably  between 
65  and  70 ;  that  Matthew  was  later  than  Mark,  though 
probably  written  between  70  and  75  ;  and  that  the  origin 
of  Luke  is  to  be  placed  between  78  and  93.^ 

While  the  Synoptical  Gospels  cannot  properly  claim  the 
character  of  contemporary  records,  it  may  still  be  urged 
that  they  were  written  at  an  advantageous  date.  The 
character  of  Jesus  and  the  significance  of  His  work  and 
message  could  be  viewed  at  a  little  distance  from  the  histor- 
ical theatre  in  a  truer  perspective  than  would  have  been 
attainable  from  a  contiguous  standpoint.  As  has  been 
said,  "  The  Gospels  in  reality  do  more  for  us,  written 
between  65  and  105,  than  they  would  have  done  if  com- 
posed before  35.  .  .  .  It  needed  the  four  decades  between 
30  and  70  to  render  the  period  before  30  luminous."  ^ 
The  actual  interval  was  long  enough  to  give  to  reflection 
and  experience  a  chance  to  bring  about  something  like  a 
fair  understanding  of  the  evangelical  history.  At  the 
same  time  the  interval  was  not  so  long  as  to  effect  a  for- 
feiture of  the  benefit  of  the  vital  reminiscence  of  those  who 
had  been  the  companions  of  the  Master  during  the  period 
of  His  public  ministry.  The  impress  of  that  reminiscence 
is  stamped  upon  these  writings.  In  the  quality  and 
trend  of  their  teaching  they  so  clearly  attest  a  unique 
individuality  as  to  enforce  the  conviction  that  they  were 
generated  by  a  historical  reality,  and  on  the  whole  kept 

1  Die  Chronologie  deraltchristlichen  Litteratur,  I.  653-655.  Jiilicher 
prefers  somewhat  later  dates. 

^  Moffatt,  The  Historical  New  Testament,  pp.  14-16. 


52  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

close  to  that  reality.  The  peculiarity  of  their  language, 
too,  is  quite  in  accord  with  this  conviction.  "  The  Greek 
language  lies  upon  these  writings  like  a  diaphanous  veil, 
and  it  requires  hardly  any  effort  to  retranslate  their  con- 
tents into  the  Hebrew  or  Aramaic.  That  the  tradition 
here  presented  to  us  is,  in  the  main,  at  first  hand  is 
obvious."  ^ 

The  survival  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  (not  to  speak 
here  of  the  fourth  Gospel)  is  a  token  that  in  respect  of 
trustworthiness  and  value  they  could  claim  a  primacy 
among  the  early  attempts  to  record  the  words  and  deeds 
of  Christ.  To  be  sure  it  is  conceivable  that  adventitious 
causes  might  have  worked  to  suppress  worthy  rivals. 
But  what  is  known  of  uncanonical  Gospels  does  not  lead  us 
to  believe  that  any  of  them  had  an  equal  title  to  survival 
with  the  Synoptical.  The  majority  of  those  whose  titles 
have  come  down  to  us  are  quite  outside  the  field  of  com- 
parison. In  the  present  connection  there  is  scanty 
occasion  to  mention  any  of  them  except  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  the  Hebrews,  the  Gospel  according  to  the 
Egyptians,  and  the  Gospel  of  Peter. 

The  references  of  Clement  of  Alexandria,  of  Origen, 
of  Eusebius,  and  especially  of  Jerome,  to  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  the  Hebrews  maybe  taken  as  indicating  that  in 
its  general  tenor  this  version  of  Christ's  life  could  not 
have  been  very  remote  from  the  Synoptical  Gospels. 
Had  it  contained  much  matter  adapted  to  provoke  a 
sharp  antipathy  in  Catholic  minds,  the  references  to  it 
would  naturally  have  been  characterized  by  a  different 
tone.     Still  its  title  to  rank  with  the  Synoptical  Gospels 

1  Harnack,  "What  is  Christianity  ?  p.  21. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  53 

as  a  treasury  of  primitive  tradition  is  open  to  question. 
Several  of  the  citations  which  make  up  the  scanty  re- 
mains of  this  Hebrew  Gospel  are  not  favorable  to  the 
assumption  of  parity.  A  dogmatizing  element  enters  in- 
to its  account  of  Christ's  baptism  both  in  the  broaching 
by  Him  of  the  subject  of  His  sinlessness,  and  in  the 
characterizing  of  Him  as  the  Son,  the  firstborn,  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  the  sought-for  resting  place  of  that^ 
Spirit.  The  superior  simplicity  and  sobriety  of  the 
Synoptical  representation  suggest  that  it  is  the  more  orig- 
inal version  of  the  baptismal  incident.  In  still  more  un- 
favorable contrast  with  the  Synoptical  narrative  is  the 
fantastic  statement  that  the  mother  of  Christ,  that  is, 
the  Holy  Spirit,  transported  Him  by  a  single  hair  of  His 
head  to  Mount  Tabor.  Finally  a  Judaizing  preference 
for  James  crops  out  in  the  affirmation  that  the  risen  Lord 
first  of  all  appeared  to  James  —  a  representation  which 
contradicts  Pauline  testimony  as  well  as  the  Synoptical 
records.  Items  like  this  certainly  justify  the  very  general 
disposition  which  has  been  manifested  by  scholars  to  place 
this  writing  in  a  rank  distinctly  secondary  to  that  of  the 
Synoptical  Gospels.^ 

It  might  be  judged  from  the  title  of  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  the  Egyptians  that  this  writing  at  one  time 
had  wide  currency  in  Egypt.  But  too  large  a  conclusion 
ought  not  to  be  built  upon  a  mere  name.  It  is  quite 
possible  that  the  title  contained  an  element  of  exaggera- 

1  For  a  full  view  of  the  data  which  pertain  to  the  topic  see  Handmann, 
Das  Hebraer-Evangelium ;  Harnack,  Die  Chronologie  der  altchristlichen 
Litteratur,  I.  625-651 ;  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents, 
Part  I.  pp.  250-264. 


54  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

tion.  Then,  too,  it  is  probable  that  it  was  designed  to 
cover  only  native  Egyptians  as  distinguished  both  from 
those  of  Jewish  and  those  of  Greek  descent ;  and  no 
one  knows  what  proportion  of  the  Christians  in  Egypt 
was  included  in  the  first  of  these  parties  when  the  title 
*' according  to  the  Egyptians"  was  attached  to  the  Gos- 
pel. The  lack  of  any  reference  to  it  by  Eusebius  is  an 
indication  that  in  the  sight  of  the  Church  at  large  it 
obtained  little  prominence.  As  to  its  content,  the  means 
of  judging  are  scanty.  Origen  simply  mentions  it  among 
heretical  Gospels.^  From  Clement  of  Alexandria  we  learn 
that  it  was  associated,  whether  fairly  or  unfairly,  with  the 
teaching  of  the  Encratites,^  and  Epiphanius  informs  us 
that  it  was  a  chief  source  of  a  Sabellian  or  modalistic 
christology.^  On  the  whole  the  extant  data  quite  de- 
cidedly fall  short  of  accrediting  it  as  having  any  just  claim 
to  take  rank  with  the  Synoptical  Gospels.  The  Sabellian 
feature  is  certainly  the  reverse  of  a  sign  of  primitiveness. 
At  least  critics  who  are  disposed  to  regard  an  Ebionite 
christology  as  a  sign  of  early  origin  cannot  consistently 
attach  a  like  significance  to  a  Sabellian  christology,  for 
the  two  were  wide  apart  in  dogmatic  intention.* 

The  Gospel  of  Peter  is  mentioned  by  Eusebius  as  be- 
ing quite  outside  the  circle  of  Catholic  recognition.^ 
Notice,  however,  was  taken  of  an  item  in  it  by  Origen.^ 

1  In  Luc.  i. 

2  Strom,  iii,  9,  13. 
^Panar.  Ixii.  2. 

*  See  Harnack,  Chronologie,  I.  612-622;  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as 
Historical  Documents,  I.  264-268. 

5  Hist.  Eccl.  iii.  3. 

6  In  Matt.  X.  17. 


THE   SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  55 

Back  of  Origen  it  is  not  certainly  known  to  have  been 
mentioned  by  any  other  writer  than  Serapion.  It  has 
indeed  been  conjectured  that  Justin  Martyr  referred  to 
this  Gospel  under  the  title  "  Memoirs  of  Peter  "  ;  ^  but 
the  point  is  in  dispute.^  The  extant  portion  of  the  Gos- 
pel of  Peter  relates  to  the  passion  and  resurrection  of 
Christ.  From  this  portion  it  is  made  quite  evident  that 
the  author  wished  to  propagate  docetic  views.  Some- 
what of  an  occasion  for  discounting  his  narrative  is  also 
found  in  the  singular  account  which  he  gives  of  the 
authority  and  agency  of  Herod  in  connection  with  the 
trial  and  crucifixion  of  Christ.  Possibly  the  Gospel  of 
Peter  may  have  recorded  some  extra-canonical  items  that 
were  based  on  genuine  tradition ;  but  what  is  known 
about  its  contents  is  not  adapted  to  foster  a  very  high 
opinion  of  its  merits.  Its  fraudulent  claim  to  have  ema- 
nated from  the  Apostle  Peter  is  justly  reckoned  as  a 
ground  of  limited  confidence  in  its  trustworthiness. 

As  respects  sayings  which  may  with  any  fair  degree  of 
probability  be  imputed  to  Jesus,  the  Apocryphal  Gospels, 
or  more  broadly  speaking,  all  extra-canonical  sources  to- 
gether, make  a  very  meagre  addition  to  the  content  of 
the  New  Testament .^  Scholarship  must  doubtless  regret 
that  better  means  of  acquaintance  with  these  Gospels 
are  not  available.     Still  there  is  little  reason  to  modify 

1  Dial,  cum  Try  ph.  cvi. 

2  Compare  Hamack,  Bruchstiicke  des  Evangeliums  und  der  Apoka- 
lypse  des  Petnis;  Swete,  The  Akhmim  Fragment  of  the  Apocryphal 
Gospel  of  St.  Peter  ;  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents, 

I.  93  ff. 

*  Ropes,  Die  Spriiche  Jesu ;  also  in  Hastings'  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  V. 

343  ff. 


56        NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

this  judgment  of  Julicher :  "The  Apocryphal  Gospels 
of  the  second  century,  several  of  which  are  known  to  us 
—  such  as  that  according  to  the  Hebrews,  that  according 
to  the  Egyptians,  and  the  Gospel  of  Peter  —  are  the  re- 
sult of  working  over  the  canonical  Gospels  or  the  sources 
used  by  them,  in  conformity  to  sectarian  or  heretical 
tendencies.  Accordingly  some  individual  items  of  a 
primitive  character  may  have  found  lodgment  there.  But 
Luke  and  Matthew  stand  already  at  the  point  where  the 
production  of  Gospels  ceases  to  be  a  gain  for  the  Church, 
and  begins  to  signify  only  a  peril."  ^ 

11.  —  The  Story  of  the  Nativity. 

The  special  theological  item  which  meets  us  here  is 
that  of  the  supernatural  conception  as  taught  by  Matthew 
and  Luke.  An  examination  of  the  story  of  the  nativity 
given  by  these  evangelists  respectively  must  convey  the 
impression  that  they  made  up  their  versions  independ- 
ently. Interesting  particulars  which  are  put  in  the  fore- 
ground by  the  one  are  entirely  passed  over  by  the  other. 
It  follows  then,  since  neither  copied  from  the  other,  that 
we  have  here  the  testimony,  not  of  one,  but  of  two  repre- 
sentatives of  early  Christianity,  to  belief  in  the  super- 
natural conception  or  virgin-birth  of  Christ.  Joining 
this  fact  with  the  probable  date  of  the  Gospels  as  noticed 
above,  we  are  brought  to  the  conclusion  that  the  item  of 
the  supernatural  conception  has  a  pretty  fair  claim  to  be 
regarded  as  an  apostolic  item.  It  seems  to  have  had  a 
right  of  way  close  upon  the  border  of  the  apostolic  age, 

1  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament,  p.  301. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING 


57 


not  to  say  within  the  limits  of  that  age.  In  the  absence 
then  of  a  dogmatic  motive  for  denying  the  historical 
character  of  the  item,  one  can  rationally  be  tolerant  of 
the  verdict  that  it  stands  for  the  simple  truth. ^  At  the 
same  time,  from  the  standpoint  of  biblical  theology  there 
is  no  occasion  for  great  stress  upon  the  item  of  the 
supernatural  conception.  The  New  Testament  treats  it 
almost  exclusively  as  a  matter  of  history,  the  one  excep- 
tion being  the  remark  which  Luke  puts  into  the  mouth 
of  the  angel  of  the  annunciation  :  "  wherefore  that  which 
is  to  be  born  shall  be  called  holy,  the  Son  of  God."  These 

lAn  adverse  consideration  has  been  found  in  the  fact  that  a  Syriac 
manuscript  of  the  Gospels  (the  Sinai-Syriac),  which  is  supposed  to  be 
relatively  very  early,  makes  Matt.  i.  i6  to  read  "  Joseph  begat  Jesus." 
A  decisive  weight,  however,  need  not  be  given  to  this  fact  for  the  follow- 
ing reasons:  (i)  Joseph  was  in  the  sight  of  the  law  the  father  of  Jesus. 
So  far  as  the  latter  was  a  subject  at  all  for  a  genealogy  after  the  Jewish 
pattern  He  was  to  be  located  in  the  line  of  Joseph.  In  the  stereotyped 
form  of  the  genealogical  table  the  statement  of  this  fact  of  being  legally 
in  the  line  of  Joseph  might  run  "  Joseph  begat  Jesus,"  though  of  course 
a  little  reflection  on  the  matter  would  elicit  within  the  company  believing 
in  the  supernatural  conception  a  demand  for  mending  such  a  phrase.  A 
pretty  close  approach  to  this  inexact  way  of  speaking  may  be  observed 
in  Luke.  Notwithstanding  his  unequivocal  declaration  of  the  supernatu- 
ral conception,  the  evangelist  so  far  accommodates  himself  to  the  current 
and  natural  style  of  reference  as  to  speak  of  Joseph  as  the  father  of 
Jesus,  and  of  Joseph  and  Mary  as  the  parents  of  Jesus —  a  form  of  ex- 
pression which,  curiously  enough,  Mark  has  avoided  (vi.  3),  whether 
with  or  without  design.  (2)  Jesus  was  commonly  reputed  to  be  the  son 
of  Joseph,  Supposing  the  verity  of  the  supernatural  conception  we 
must  still  conclude  that  at  first  it  was  recognized  only  by  a  select  circle. 
But  this  circle  is  not  necessarily  to  be  deemed  an  unreliable  witness  on 
account  of  its  limited  compass.  It  is  quite  possible  that  the  Catholic 
faith  in  the  supernatural  conception  may  have  rested  back  upon  more 
competent  testimony  than  that  underlying  the  contrasted  opinion. 
Surely  it  would  take  something  more  than  a  single  instance  of  an  early 


58        NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

words  indicate  a  belief  that  ttie  supernatural  conception 
was  to  Jesus  a  source  of  extraordinary  sanctity  and  dig- 
nity. It  is  quite  too  much,  however,  to  find  in  them  a 
demonstration  that  the  writer  regarded  the  supernatural 
conception  as  the  sole  basis  of  the  special  sonship  of 
Jesus.  Luke  certainly  could  not  have  thought  thus  if 
his  companionship  with  Paul  had  any  effect    upon  his 

text  verbally  in  line  with  the  ordinary  popular  conviction  to  demonstrate 
that  belief  in  the  supernatural  conception  was  destitute  of  a  substantial 
historic  basis.  (3)  All  extant  manuscripts  of  Matthew  and  Luke,  not 
excepting  that  which  contains  the  special  version  of  Matt.  i.  16,  assert 
the  fact  of  the  supernatural  conception.  There  is  some  ground,  there- 
fore, for  suspecting  that  the  form  of  Matt.  i.  16  in  the  Sinai-Syriac  man- 
uscript represents  the  mistake  or  caprice  of  a  copyist.  (4)  There  are 
reasons  for  thinking  that,  prior  to  the  composition  of  the  first  and  third 
Gospels,  written  embodiments  had  been  given  to  belief  in  the  supernatu- 
ral conception.  "  The  story  as  given  by  our  Matthew  and  Luke,"  says 
C.  A.  Briggs,  "  does  not  come  from  these  writers,  but  from  their  sources. 
They  briefly  remark  upon  it  and  interpret  it,  but  they  do  not  materially 
change  it.  These  sources  are  poetic  in  form  and  also  in  substance,  and 
have  all  the  characteristics  of  Hebrew  poetry  as  to  parallelism,  measure- 
ment of  lines,  and  strophical  organization.  They  evidently  came  from  a 
Jewish-Christian  community  and  not  from  Gentile  Christians.  They 
are  therefore  ancient  sources,  different  from  and  yet  to  be  classed  with 
the  Gospel  of  St.  Mark  and  the  Logia  of  St.  Matthew,  rather  than  with 
our  Gospels  of  Matthew,  Luke,  and  John"  (Introduction  to  the  Study 
of  Holy  Scripture,  p.  523).  Thus  the  memorials  of  faith  in  the  super- 
natural conception  go  back  to  a  point  which  may  reasonably  be  regarded 
as  falling  within  the  domain  of  apostolic  tradition. 

It  is  noticeable  that  Lobstein,  though  distinctly  challenging  the  fact 
of  the  supernatural  conception,  fully  agrees  with  the  conclusion  that 
Matthew  and  Luke  recorded  upon  this  point  a  belief  which  had  been 
current  for  a  considerable  period.  "  Matthew  and  Luke,"  he  says,  **only 
received  and  set  down  in  writing  far  older  traditions."  (The  Virgin  Birth 
of  Christ,  pp.  77,  78).  It  is  to  be  observed  also  that  Lobstein  thinks  it 
imprudent  to  make  any  special  account  of  the  exceptional  reading  in  the 
Sinai-Syriac  manuscript  (p.  121) 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  59 

christology.  Apart  from  this  incidental  and  somewhat 
indeterminate  item,  the  New  Testament  builds  nothing 
upon  the  postulate  of  the  supernatural  conception.  In 
the  more  constructive  portions  it  receives  no  mention. 
The  supposition,  therefore,  that  the  postulate  was  intro- 
duced to  meet  a  dogmatic  demand  belongs  essentially  to 
the  sphere  of  the  historic  imagination,  and  needs  a  much 
better  substantiation  than  it  has  yet  received.  A  like 
judgment  is  to  be  passed  on  the  supposition  that  a  lively 
expectation,  current  among  the  Jews,  was  the  source  of 
belief  in  the  supernatural  conception.  Proper  traces  of 
such  an  expectation  are  not  discoverable.^  On  the  con- 
trary there  is  distinct  evidence  of  its  non-existence  in  the 
known  belief  of  the  stricter  party  among  the  Judaizing 
Ebionites  and  in  the  testimonies  of  Justin  Martyr  ^  and 
Hippolytus.^ 

III. — The  Self-Consciousness  of  Christ  as  a 
Subject  of  Development  and  a  Source  of 
Teaching. 

As  Christ  was  born  into  the  visible  estate  and  rela- 
tions of  a  child,  it  is  natural  to  suppose  that  He  had  a 
progressively  unfolding  self-consciousness,  such  as  is 
essentially  characteristic  of  the  child.     A  human  life  not 

i*'The  Jewish  common  people,"  says  Dalman,  "never  expected  the 
Messiah  to  be  born  of  a  virgin ;  and  no  trace  is  to  be  found  among  the 
Jews  of  any  Messianic  appHcation  of  Isaiah's  words  (vii.  14)  concerning 
the  virgin's  son,  from  which  by  any  possibility  —  as  some  have  main- 
tained—  the  whole  account  of  the  miraculous  birth  of  Jesus  could  have 
derived  its  origin  "  (The  Words  of  Jesus,  p.  276). 

2  Dial,  cum  Tryph.,  xlix.  i. 

8  Philosophumena,  ix.  25. 


6o  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

subject  in  its  psychical  experience  to  the  law  of  growth 
would  be  human  only  in  the  most  superficial  sense,  that 
of  mere  outward  semblance.  Unless  then  we  are  to 
impeach  the  candor  and  reality  of  the  gospel  revelation, 
and  to  justify  a  pronounced  docetism*,  we  must  suppose 
Christ  to  have  been  a  subject  of  development  in  His 
inner  consciousness,  as  well  as  in  outward  or  physical 
respects.  If  there  is  any  motive  at  all  for  denying  this 
development  it  must  be  on  the  score  of  a  theoretic 
Christology,  a  supposed  necessity  that  special  union  with 
the  divine  should  have  cancelled,  on  the  part  of  Christ, 
all  limitation  of  knowledge,  all  natural  occasion  for 
growth  in  the  understanding  of  Himself  and  of  the  uni- 
verse. Now  in  response  to  this  theoretic  Christology  it 
is  to  be  said,  in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  by  no  means  cer- 
tain that  it  is  sustained  by  any  cogent  theoretical  demand. 
Being  and  consciousness  are  never  commensurate  in  us, 
and  least  of  all  are  they  so  at  the  beginning  of  our  career. 
We  are  born  into  relations  which  are  far  above  the  plane 
of  our  cognizance  in  early  childhood.  The  analogy 
suggests  that  in  the  Christ-child  and  the  Christ-youth 
consciousness  may  not  have  been  by  any  means  com- 
mensurate with  being  and  essential  relations.  Granting 
that  from  the  start  there  was  an  organic  bond  with  the 
divine,  perfectly  unique,  never  duplicated  in  creaturely 
history,  still  it  might  be  that  in  the  consciousness  of  the 
Son  of  Mary  this  should  be  unrevealed  until  some  fav- 
ored moment  should  afford  an  initial  glimpse  of  it,  and 
that  advance  to  a  full  understanding  of  it  should  be 
along  the  path  of  a  widening  and  deepening  experience. 
Again  it  is  to  be  replied  to  the  theoretic  christology  in 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  6l 

question  that  it  is  not  privileged  to  put  aside  facts  in  the 
interest  of  mere  theory. 

Turning  to  the  gospel  narratives  we  find  their  implica- 
tion unmistakably  on  the  side  of  a  progressive  unf  oldment 
of  the  consciousness  of  Christ,  or  of  His  understanding 
of  Himself  and  the  divine  kingdom.  In  the  first  place 
it  is  to  be  noticed  that  one  of  the  evangelists  as  much 
as  definitely  asserts  progressive  unfoldment.  "Jesus 
advanced,"  says  Luke,  "  in  wisdom  and  in  stature  "  (ii.  52). 
In  the  second  place  it  is  to  be  observed  tEat  all  three  of 
the  Synoptists  distinctly  represent  Christ  as  subject  to 
temptation.  Now  temptation  is  properly  the  experience 
of  a  growing  subject  and  not  of  one  who  occupies  the 
standpoint  of  omniscience.  In  the  presence  of  the  abso-- 
lutely  unlimited  vision  any  solicitation  to  defection  from 
the  perfect  way  should  no  more  be  able  to  subsist  than 
is  a  piece  of  cotton  gauze  in  the  intensest  flame.  More- 
over, the  nature  of  the  temptations  which  are  detailed 
by  the  evangelists  is  suggestive  of  an  experience  of  growth 
or  inward  clarification.  They  seemed  to  have  concerned  y 
especially  the  method  of  carrying  out  the  high  vocation 
to  which  Christ  knew  Himself  to  be  called  as  he  passed 
from  the  baptismal  scene.  Should  popular  desire  and 
expectation  be  gratified  by  a  resort  to  the  method  of 
power  and  display,  or  should  the  humble  and  cross-bear- 
ing method  be  undeviatingly  pursued  }  —  that  appears  to 
have  been  the  question  with  which  He  was  called  to 
wrestle.  His  spirit  was  quick  to  see  the  affinity  of  the 
former  alternative  with  the  kingdom  of  evil,  and  to  repel 
it  as  a  misleading  or  Satanic  suggestion;  but  who  can 
doubt  that  He  passed  out  of  this  experience  with  a  clearer 


62  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

and  in  tenser  view  of  Messianic  method  than  that  which 
previously  had  been  entertained  by  Him?  His  being 
tempted  was  not  a  mere  spectacle  for  outsiders  to  con- 
template. It  was  in  all  probability  a  stage  in  the  unfold- 
ment  of  His  own  sense  of  the  requirements  of  His 
peculiar  vocation.  Again,  the  evangelists  use  language 
which  naturally  implies  that  Christ's  experience  included 
the  unexpected,  that  He  was  capable  of  the  emot.'on 
of  surprise.  He  marvelled,  it  is  said,  at  extraordinary 
instances  both  of  faith  and  unbelief.^  Once  more,  in 
disclaiming  knowledge  of  a  particular  future  event  ^ 
Christ  showed  that  the  order  of  mental  life  to  which  He 
was  subject  admitted  of  an  increasing  content.  We 
conclude,  then,  that  the  sacred  biographies  invite  us  to 
believe  that  Christ  had  a  real  childhood,  and  a  real  youth, 
and  a  real  manhood,  as  being  under  the  human  law  of 
growth  and  as  advancing  not  merely  from  the  forseen  to 
the  actual  but  from  the  unknown  to  the  known  as  well. 
In  making  this  statement  we  speak,  obviously,  only  of 
the  consciousness  in  our  Lord  which  was  immediately 
back  of  His  communication  with  the  world,  the  conscious- 
ness expressed  in  such  conceptions  and  forms  of  speech 
as  belong  to  the  time  sphere  in  which  man  lives.  How 
this  consciousness  was  related  to  the  timeless  life  of  the 
eternal  Son,  the  Divine  Logos,  it  is  not  attempted  in 
this  connection  to  determine.  That  is  rather  a  question 
for  speculative  dogmatics  than  for  biblical  theology. 

In  considering  the  unfoldment  of  Christ's  self-conscious- 
ness it  ill  becomes  us  to  assume  that  we  can  gauge  its 

1  Matt.  viii.  lo;  Mark  vi.  6;  Luke  vii.  9. 

2  Matt.  xxiv.  36  •  Mark  xiii.  32. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  63 

progress  with  anything  like  precision.  The  subject  has 
never  been  directly  reported  upon,  and  the  indirect  tokens 
are  not  abundant ;  for  there  is  no  adequate  warrant  for 
supposing  that  the  moment  when  a  truth  relative  to  Him- 
self was  first  declared  was  also  the  moment  of  its  first 
emergence  into  His  own  consciousness.  Religious  dis- 
cretion may  have  put  a  seal  upon  His  lips  for  long  inter- 
y  vals.  Possibly  the  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  the  age  of  twelve, 
when  He  put  the  puzzling  question  to  His  parents, 
**Wist  ye  not  that  I  must  be  in  my  Father's  house,"  or 
''in  the  affairs  of  my  Father,"  marked  a  special  stage  of 
inward  premonition  as  to  His  unique  relation  and  calling. 
The  ToO  TraTjOo?  \iov  of  that  question  was  certainly  quite 
foreign  to  the  ordinary  dialect  of  the  Jewish  child,  and 
indicated  the  dawning  of  a  peculiar  sense  of  intimacy  with 
the  Father  in  heaven.  It  is  not  ascertained,  it  is  true, 
that  in  uttering  these  words  He  spoke  a  sentiment  which 
had  just  come  into  His  consciousness.  Still  there  is 
nothing  improbable  in  the  supposition  that  the  special 
occasion  was  providentially  utilized  as  a  means  of  special 
inner  revelation.  That  this  was  the  case  in  the  next 
recorded  scene  of  his  life,  the  baptism  in  the  Jordan, 
there  is  no  reason  to  doubt.  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  in 
the  report  of  this  scene  by  both  Matthew  and  Mark  the 
manifestation  from  heaven  is  represented  as  directed  to 
Jesus  personally,  and  not  to  the  bystanders;  also  that 
Luke  agrees  with  Mark  in  representing  the  voice  owning 
Jesus  as  the  well-beloved  Son  to  -have  been  addressed 
to  Him  rather  than  to  the  people.  We  are  thus  in- 
vited to  believe  that,  whatever  light  was  already  upon 
the  spirit  of  Jesus  in  divine  relations,  He  reached  here  a 


64  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

new  stage  in  His  advance  toward  a  perfectly  luminous 
self -consciousness.  As  already  indicated,  the  testing  to 
which  He  was  subjected  in  the  great  initial  temptation, 
was  probably  also  a  means  of  clarifying  and  settling  His 
conviction  respecting  the  extraordinary  office  which  He 
was  to  fulfill.  Beyond  this  stage  there  is  in  our  view, 
little  ground  for  attempting  to  specify,  though  it  is  quite 
credible  that  the  events  of  His  ministry  may  have  con- 
tributed to  a  full-orbed  consciousness  of  Himself  and  His 
position.  Some  have  argued  that  His  foresight  of  the 
cross  was  stimulated  by  His  discovery  of  the  utter  hope- 
lessness of  receiving  aught  but  sharp  hostility  from  the 
ruhng  party  in  His  nation.  But  this  is  un verifiable  con- 
jecture. No  one  can  determine  in  such  a  matter  what 
was  due  to  external  conditions  and  what  to  inward  reve- 
lation. We  may  suppose  the  inward  and  the  outward  to 
have  wrought  together,  but  we  shall  do  poor  justice  to 
the  personality  of  Jesus  unless  we  make  large  account  of 
the  former.  The  singular  openness  of  His  spirit  toward 
heaven  is  rationally  emphasized  as  being  the  medium  of 
extraordinary  illumination. 

In  the  self-consciousness  of  Christ  two  cardinal  dis- 
tinctions may  be  noticed.  The  first  is  the  utter  absence 
of  any  shadow  of  sin.  The  tenor  of  the  Synoptical  Gos- 
pels is  in  accord  with  the  categorical  declarations  by  the 
apostles  of  Christ's  perfect  sinlessness.  These  Gospels 
do  not  indeed  make  a  formal  declaration  on  the  subject. 
The  evidence  they  afford  is  indirect,  but  it  is  not  scanty. 
In  the  first  place  there  is  no  sort  of  indication  that  Christ 
ever  uttered  a  prayer  for  forgiveness  or  cherished  an 
emotion  of  penitence.    In  the  second  place  He  is  exhibited 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING        65 

as  possessing  such  an  extraordinary  balance  of  the  high- 
est positive  virtues  that  the  lack  of  expressed  penitence 
cannot  reasonably  be  imputed  to  a  blind  self-inflation  or 
to  any  sort  of  mere  eccentricity.  Thirdly,  Christ  asso- 
ciated Himself  with  the  impartation  of  divine  benefits  in 
a  way  implying  that  He  felt  no  need  of  any  friendly  offices 
in  His  own  behalf,  but  rather  was  qualified  to  fulfill  such 
in  behalf  of  all  others.^  Fourthly,  Christ  placed  Himself 
outside  the  rank  of  sinners  in  declaring  His  blood  to  be 
shed  for  the  remission  of  sins.  Fifthly,  He  equally  ex- 
alted Himself  above  the  plane  of  a  common  sinful 
humanity  in  describing  Himself  as  destined  to  sit  upon 
the  throne  of  judgment  and  to  hold  in  His  hands  the 
awards  of  eternity.  In  short,  the  Synoptical  representation 
plainly  invites  to  faith  in  a  Christ  free  from  every  stain 
and  trammel  of  sin.  It  is  not  impossible  indeed  for  the 
one  who  is  bent  upon  finding  a  flaw  to  read  it  into  two 
or  three  items  in  the  report  of  Christ's  words  or  deeds. 
But  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  evangelists 
themselves  had  the  slightest  misgiving  over  these  items. 
It  is  the  stainless  Master  whom  they  understood  them- 
selves to  be  picturing. 

The  second  great  distinction  of  Christ's  self-conscious- 
ness is  His  luminous  sense  of  sonship  in  relation  to  God. 
This  is  to  be  regarded  as  closely  related  to  the  foregoing. 
Just  because  there  was  no  ground  of  self-reproach  in 
Christ,  no  shadow  of  condemnation  on  His  spirit,  He  was 
qualified  to  exemplify  the  filial  character  as  it  was  never 
exemplified  by  any  other  member  of  the  race.  He  had 
no  cause  for  faltering  or  abashment  in  His  approach  to 

iMatt.  xviii.  19,  20, 


66  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  Father.  Not  merely  in  some  moment  of  special  ex- 
altation, but  habitually,  He  dwelt  in  the  light  of  the 
Father's  face,  and  knew  that  He  was  the  recipient  of  His 
complacent  love.  In  the  Synoptical  account  there  may 
not  be,  it  is  true,  so  direct  an  assertion  of  unbroken  union 
and  fellowship  as  is  embodied  in  the  Johannine  words, 
*'I  and  my  Father  are  one."  But  there  is  an  implication 
of  the  same  truth  in  the  strong  words  recorded  by  both 
Matthew  and  Luke :  *'  All  things  have  been  delivered 
unto  me  of  my  Father  ;  and  no  one  knoweth  the  Son, 
save  the  Father ;  neither  doth  any  know  the  Father, 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  willeth  to 
reveal  Him."  ^  This  consciousness  of  an  exclusive  pre- 
rogative to  reveal  the  Father  argues  a  perfectly  unclouded 
assurance  of  moral  unity  with  Him.  It  testifies  to  a 
sense  of  perfect  sonship. 

This  was  the  source  of  Christ's  teaching.  Christianity 
was  born  in  this  holy  of  holies  —  the  consciousness  of 
Christ  as  the  stainless  Son,  having  the  full-orbed  sense 
of  sonship.  He  could  give  an  authentic  exposition  of 
God  because  He  was  so  perfectly  in  touch  with  the  Father. 
He  could  set  forth  in  clear  outlines  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
for  He  was  the  ideal  citizen  of  that  kingdom,  and  fulfilled 
its  aim  and  end  in  His  perfect  harmony  and  loving  fel- 
lowship with  the  Father.  He  could  point  out  to  men  the 
way  of  life,  for  He  knew  by  inner  possession  what  is  the 
true  life  of  man's  spirit.  Here  was  the  source  of  His 
matchless  confidence.  He  could  teach  with  authority 
because  He  had  authority  in  Himself.  The  constitu- 
ents  of    His    self-consciousness  were    His    credentials. 

iMatt.  xi.  27;  Luke  x.  22. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  6/ 

No  spiritual  dynamic,   no  mere  afflatus   from  without, 
could  have  taken  the  place  of  these.     The  luminous  per- 
sonality was  the  spring  of  the  illuminating  utterances. 
He  gave  of  His  own,  and  that  is  why  He  spoke  with 
such  freshness  and  simplicity.     He  had  no  need  of  the 
compiler's  art.     The  truth  was  in  His  spirit,  and  He  had 
but  to  express  it  in  the  intelligible  images  which  His  eye 
was  quick  to  discover  in  nature  and  human  society.     As 
Beyschlag  remarks,  *'  His  speech  is  all  directness,  living 
perception,  pure  genius ;  everything  in  it  flows,  not  from 
any  mediated  or  artificial  world  of  ideas,  but  from  native 
spiritual  wealth,  from  the  fullness  of  His  inner  life."^ 
This  is  a  truth  which  merits  to  be  profoundly  empha- 
sized.    Christ  was  and  is  the  religious  teacher  of  man- 
kind because  of  the  habitual  and  ideal  realization  of  the 
highest  truths  in  His  own  consciousness.     Doubtless  He 
deferred  to  and  took  from  the  Old  Testament.     It  was 
matter  of  the  plainest  discretion  in  dealing  with  an  Old 
Testament  community  to  move  not  a  little  in  the  field  of 
Old  Testament  imagery.     But   Christ,  at   least  at  the 
stage  of  His  public  ministry,  really  appropriated  from 
the  Jewish  oracles  only  because  their  best  was  in  har- 
mony  with    His   moral   and    religious    intuition.     The 
superior  standard  was  in  Himself,  and  He  had  no  hesi- 
tation in  setting  maxims  of  His  own  above  the  ancestral 
code.     Were  we  to  judge  from  His  silence,  we  should 
be  led  to  conclude  that  there  were  broad  tracts  of  the 
Old  Testament  which  had  a  very  subordinate  significance 
to  His  mind. 

1  New  Testament  Theology,  I.  32. 


68  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

IV.  —  Some  Distinguishing  Characteristics  of 
Christ's  Teaching. 

We  have  just  mentioned  one  of  these  in  specifying  the 
intimate  connection  which  subsisted  between  the  teach- 
ing of  Christ  and  His  unique  consciousness  as  the  Son 
who  enjoyed  perfect  communion  with  the  Father.  A 
second  characteristic  is  not  undeserving  of  being  placed 
alongside  of  this,  namely,  the  inseparable  union  which 
the  words  of  Christ  from  first  to  last  assume  to  subsist 
between  morality  and  religion.  The  misadjustment  into 
which  the  historical  religions  generally  have  run,  mostly 
in  the  line  of  subordinating  the  ethical  to  the  formally 
religious,  but  occasionally  also,  in  the  line  of  a  relative 
slighting  of  the  properly  religious,  has  no  counterpart  in 
the  scheme  set  forth  by  Christ.  The  most  casual  peru- 
sal of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  cannot  fail  to  reveal  with 
what  absolute  decision  the  notion  is  repudiated  that  any 
performances  in  the  name  of  religion  can  take  the  place 
of  a  conscientious  and  straightforward  discharge  of  duty 
to  oner's  fellows.  Stress  upon  the  ethical  appears  at 
every  turn.  It  appears  in  blessings  pronounced  upon 
the  merciful  and  the  peace-makers;  in  the  strong  con- 
demnation uttered  against  anger  and  intemperate  railing ; 
in  the  requirement  to  be  first  reconciled,  so  far  as  pos- 
sible, with  one's  brother  before  approaching  God's  altar; 
in  the  demand  for  a  chastity  which  imposes  full  restraint 
even  upon  the  thoughts  and  the  desires  ;  in  the  inculcation 
of  a  charity  and  good-will  which  are  broad  and  earnest 
enough  to  do  good  not  merely  to  friends  but  to  enemies 
also;  in  the  instruction  that  consistent  and  effectual 
prayer  for  divine  forgiveness  must  be  accompanied  by 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  69 

the  spirit  of  forgiveness  towards  those  who  have  tres- 
passed against  us;  in  insistence  upon  transparent  sin- 
cerity and  singleness  of  purpose ;  in  reprobation  of  that 
haste  in  judgment  which  leads  one  to  rebuke  the  faults 
of  his  fellows  before  taking  time  to  discover  his  own ;  in 
emphasis  upon  the  duty  to  order  conduct  towards  others 
as  one  would  wish  to  have  conduct  ordered  toward  him- 
self ;  in  lifting  up  the  requirement  of  equal  love  to  the 
neighbor  to  a  place  of  honor  beside  the  supreme  obligation 
of  a  man.  It  appears,  moreover,  in  the  whole  attitude  of 
Christ  toward  the  Pharisaic  model.  Upon  nothing  did 
He  so  fix  the  imprint  of  scornful  reprobation  as  upon  the 
disposition  to  rate  ceremonial  scrupulosity  above  careful- 
ness to  fulfill  the  common  duties  springing  out  of  the 
relations  of  man  to  man.  To  His  mind  this  was  a 
shabby,  whitewashed  substitute  for  religion,  a  lying  sem- 
blance deserving  the  very  acme  of  righteous  indignation. 
On  the  other  hand,  Christ  was  very  remote  from  sub- 
stituting simple  ethics  for  religion.  His  point  of  view 
was  not  that  of  Confucius  with  his  pale  regard  for  the 
thought  of  the  Divine  Being.  Still  less  was  it  that  of 
Gautama  with  his  virtual  exclusion  of  the  Divine  Being 
altogether  from  the  sphere  of  practical  consideration. 
As  clearly  as  He  held  in  view  the  ethical  province,  so 
clearly  He  held  in  view  the  all-encompassing  presence 
of  the  divine.  The  thought  of  the  heavenly  Father  was 
to  Him  as  the  sun  in  the  sky.  Divorce  from  fellowship 
with  Him  was  equivalent  in  His  conception  to  doom  to 
outer  darkness.  Spiritual  victory  He  regarded  as  depend- 
ent upon  cleaving  closely  to  God ;  and  the  pathway  to 
true  peace  and  superiority  to  earthly  trouble  which  He 


70        NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

set  before  men  was  the  path  of  self-delivery  to  God,  and 
of  simple  trust  in  His  minute  unceasing  care.  From 
first  to  last  in  the  teaching  of  Christ  there  is  no  sugges- 
tion but  that  the  true  life  for  man  is  one  insphered  in 
the  thought  of  God  and  in  the  grateful  consciousness 
of  His  presence.  In  short,  religion  in  no  wise  falls  be- 
hind morality  as  a  subject  of  profound  emphasis.  The 
two  are  combined  in  beautiful  unity. 

Another  characteristic  of  Christ's  teaching  is  the 
union  of  simplicity  and  elevation  which  it  exemplifies. 
The  ideal  which  He  sets  forth  is  very  lofty,  but  at  the 
same  time  it  is  thoroughly  human.  This  is  especially 
true  of  His  teaching  in  the  Synoptical  representation. 
In  the  fourth  Gospel  a  mystical  element  finds  place,  and 
if  we  accept  the  substantial  fidelity  of  this  Gospel  to  his- 
tory we  shall  be  led  to  conclude  that  Christ  did  not 
wholly  avoid  those  mystical  aspects  which  in  fact  pertain 
to  the  spiritual  world  and  to  man's  connection  therewith. 
But  it  accords  with  our  view  of  the  relatively  objective 
cast  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  to  suppose  that  they 
reflect  the  dominant  tone  of  Christ's  teaching.  We 
conclude  then  that  Christ  kept  the  mystical  element 
within  bounds,  and  occupied  His  discourse  mainly  with 
the  more  intelligible  aspects  of  truth.  He  sketched  an 
ideal  which  any  one  who  contemplated  it  might  feel  was 
made  for  a  real  world  and  real  human  beings,  adapted 
rather  to  lead  on  to  the  attainment  of  manhood  than  to 
put  something  unknown  and  strange  in  its  place.  No- 
where in  His  words  do  we  find  a  hint  that  union  with 
God  implies  a  swamping  of  self-consciousness,  a  species 
of  annihilation  such  as  is  involved  in  the  Neo-Platonic 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING        /I 

doctrine  of  ecstasy  and  the  Brahmanical  doctrine  of 
reabsorption.  Nowhere  do  we  hear  a  summons  to  lose 
self  save  in  the  sense  of  a  rational  absorption  in  the  pur- 
suit of  great,  holy,  and  benevolent  ends.  The  call  is 
homeward.  The  marked  tendency  of  Christ's  teaching 
is,  in  truth,  to  make  the  man  who  truly  appropriates  it  at 
home  both  with  himself  and  with  God.  It  rebukes  nothing 
that  is  purely  and  truly  human.  Equally  free  from  false 
asceticism  and  fanciful  mysticism,  it  is  sane  and  practical 
without  being  prosaic  or  commonplace. 

In  respect  of  form  the  teaching  of  Christ  was  in  the 
line  of  genial  address,  as  opposed  to  formal  disquisition. 
It  partook  of  the  qualities  of  vivid,  poetic,  imaginative 
conversation.  With  scholastic  elaboration  it  had  no 
affinity.  It  was  popular  oratory,  discourse  adapted  in 
respect  of  its  terms  to  penetrate  to  the  understanding  of 
the  average  man.  As  being  in  the  Hne  of  popular  oratory, 
Christ's  speech  was  necessarily  distinguished  by  a  meas- 
ure of  accommodation.  Speech  that  falls  under  that 
category  can  never  be  in  an  unknown  tongue.  At  what- 
ever new  conception  it  may  aim,  it  must  make  large  use 
of  current  expressions  and  forms  of  thought.  In  follow- 
ing the  path  of  this  rational  accommodation  Christ  simply 
chose  the  effectual  way  to  get  his  message  into  the  world. 
Not  otherwise  could  he  have  secured  for  it  the  needful 
lodgment  in  the  minds  and  the  hearts  of  men.  Doubt- 
less it  is  possible  to  push  the  notion  of  accommodation 
too  far ;  but  it  may  legitimately  be  given  a  considerable 
scope.  In  picturesque,  popular  discourse  it  was  practi- 
cally necessary  for  Christ  to  weave  into  His  speech  nu- 
merous items  from  the  intellectual  and  religious  environ- 


72  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ment.  Matters  of  this  kind  often  served  as  a  framework 
or  scaffolding  for  setting  forth  His  proper  message,  and 
the  design  which  went  with  their  use  is  better  described 
as  pictorial  or  rhetorical  than  as  dogmatic.  No  one 
supposes  that  Christ  meant  to  teach  astronomy  when  He 
spoke  of  the  rising  of  the  sun,  or  to  meddle  with  ques- 
tions of  geographical  location  when  He  spoke  of  laying 
up  treasure  in  heaven.  With  little  better  right  can  a 
dogmatic  intent  be  imputed  to  His  use  of  customary 
forms  in  citing  Old  Testament  literature,  or  to  His  casual 
employment  of  popular  conceptions  on  such  themes  as 
angelology,  demonology,  and  eschatology.  Sober  inter- 
pretation of  Christ's  teaching  requires,  therefore,  careful 
discrimination  between  the  main  truth  elucidated  and  the 
simple  accessory.  The  latter  may  indeed  belong  within 
the  province  of  revelation,  but  a  merely  incidental  use  of 
it  in  a  given  connection  is  inadequate  ground  for  assigning 
it  to  that  province. 

The  popular  form  of  Christ's  discourse  may  explain  an 
occasional  resort  to  hyperbole.  A  principle  embodied  in 
a  clear-cut,  unqualified  aphorism  was  better  suited  to 
seize  hold  of  the  attention  of  men  and  to  enhst  memory 
and  interest  in  its  behalf  than  a  principle  wrapped  up  in 
limiting  clauses.  What  way  of  setting  forth  the  duty  of 
avoiding  the  vengeful  spirit  could  be  more  striking  and 
effective  than  to  speak  of  offering  the  other  cheek  to  the 
smiter  .?  How  could  the  duty  of  uniting  simplicity  with 
transparent  sincerity  in  speech,  as  opposed  to  an  artificial 
and  arbitrary  scheme  of  oaths,  be  more  vividly  impressed 
than  by  an  injunction  to  swear  not  at  all  ?  Instructions 
of  this  kind  picture  the  ideal  spirit  which  ought  to  rule 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  73 

conduct.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  they  were 
designed  to  be  fulfilled  with  strict  literalness,  or  with  un- 
bending refusal  of  accommodation  to  modifying  conditions 
beyond  the  control  of  the  individual.  Indeed,  if  we  may 
trust  the  testimony  of  the  fourth  evangelist,  Christ  Him- 
self intimated  as  much  by  the  rebuke  which  He  ministered 
to  the  one  unlawfully  smiting  Him  when  arraigned  before 
the  high  priest. 


V.  —  The  Trend  of  Christ's  Teaching  Respecting 

THE  Nature  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  and  the 

Conditions  of  Entrance. 

The  kingdom  of  God,  or  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  as 
Matthew,  differing  herein  from  Mark  and  Luke,  preferred 
to  call  it,i  appears  undoubtedly  as  a  central  theme  of  the 
Synoptical  Gospels.  Jesus  is  represented  as  beginning 
His  ministry  by  preaching  the  gospel  and  declaring  to 
the  people  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  at  hand.^  He 
is  said  to  have  put  the  like  message  upon  the  lips  of 
His  disciples,  instructing  them  in  every  city  they  should 
enter  to  proclaim,  "The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand," 
"The  kingdom  of  God  has  come  nigh  unto  you."^  In 
many  of  His  parables  and  discourses  Jesus  directly 
occupied  Himself  with  expounding  the  kingdom  and 
setting  forth  the  relation  of  men  thereto.  What  his 
own  preferred  phrase  was,  whether  '♦  kingdom  of  heaven  " 
or  "kingdom  of  God,"  is  not  determined,  and  is  of  no 

1  Instances  in  which  Matthew  uses  the  former  phrase  are  xii.  28,  xix. 
24,  xxi.  31,  43. 

2  Mark  i.  14,  15.  »  Matt.  x.  7  ;  Luke  x.  9. 


74  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

consequence.  It  is  not  improbable  that  He  used  the 
two  interchangeably.  Their  sense  is  evidently  identical ; 
for  the  "kingdom  of  heaven  "  is  not  indicative  of  loca- 
tion, but  rather  of  kind  or  origin.^  It_is_the  kingdom  in 
which  the  will  of  God  rules  and  which  has  its  possibility 
of  growth  in  His  gracious  presence.  It  comes  to  earth 
when  He  is  obeyed  on  earth  as  in  heaven.  It  is  simply, 
therefore,  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  theatre  of  His  moral 
sovereignty,  as  realized  in  particular  through  the  media- 
torial work  of  the  Son. 

A  full  review  of  the  references  in  the  Synoptical  Gos- 
pels to  the  kingdom  must  give  an  impression  of  two  con- 
trasted aspects.  These  may  be  designated  respectively 
the  spiritual  and  the 'apocalyptic.  On  the  one  hand  is 
a  line  of  statements  which  presupposes  that  the  kingdom 
is  a  present  and  an  essentially  interior  reality.  On  the 
other  hand  is  a  line  of  statements  which  implies  that  the 
kingdom  is  a  future  reality,  and  is  to  come  to  manifesta- 
tion, or  be  inaugurated,  by  a  great  crisis.  As  between 
these  two  orders  of  views  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
that  popular  thinking  inclined  to  the  latter.  The  cur- 
rent conception  of  the  kingdom  was  apocalyptic,  and 
with  the  apocalyptic  aspect  a  very  decided  political  color- 
ing was  associated.  The  dominant  view  of  the  Mes- 
sianic time  was  that  of  an  era  when  a  powerful  external 
intervention,   a  putting   forth  of  divine  might,   should 


1  Bousset  regards  Matthew's  expression  as  illustrating  a  tendency 
which  had  grown  up  among  the  Jews  to  substitute  an  abstract  term  for 
the  name  of  God.  "  Heaven  is  here  simply  an  equivalent  conception 
for  God'''  (Die  Religion  des  Judenthums  ira  neutestamentlichen  Zeit- 
alter,  pp.  307,  308.) 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  75 

crush  the  hostile  forces  of  the  world  and  exalt  the  peo- 
ple of  Israel  to  a  ruling  position. 

The  teaching  of  Jesus  was  at  least  in  form  so  far  cor- 
respondent to  popular  conception  that  it  gave  a  place  to 
a  future  crisis.  It  practically  discarded,  however,  the 
political  associations  which  ruled  ordinary  Jewish  antici- 
pation at  that  day.  The  idea  of  a  proper  national 
supremacy  cannot  be  seen  to  have  entered  into  the 
eschatalogical  discourses  of  Jesus.  Thus  the  apocalyptic 
phase,  as  admitted  by  Him,  had  its  manifest  point  of 
distinction  from  the  popular  version.  But  the  greater 
distinction  in  Christ's  teaching  lay  in  the  qualification 
which  His  very  decided  stress  upon  the  spiritual  aspect 
of  the  kingdom,  as  a  present  and  interior  reality,  virtually 
put  upon  the  apocalyptic  aspect.  Some  recent  critics,  it 
is  true,  have  contended  that  the  apocalyptic  was  the 
ruling  point  of  view  in  Christ's  mind.  But  evidence  to 
the  contrary  is  interwoven  with  the  gospel  narratives. 
In  the  first  place,  Christ  seems  to  give  a  present  and 
spiritual  character  to  the  kingdom  when  He  says,  refer- 
ring to  the  still  living  John  the  Baptist,  *'  He  that  is 
little  in  the  kingdom  of  God  is  greater  than  he."  ^  A 
like  implication  of  a  present  and  spiritual  realm  is  con- 
tained in  the  connected  words  representing  the  attain- 
ment of  the  kingdom  as  the  result  of  eager  pursuit : 
"  From  the  days  of  John  the  Baptist  until  now  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  suffereth  violence  and  the  men  of  vio- 
lence take  it  by  force."  ^  A  present  reality  is  also  given 
to  the  kingdom  when  Christ  says  to  the  Pharisees,  "  The 

1  Luke  vii.  28;  Matt.  xi.  11.  2  Matt.  xi.  12;  Luke  xvi.  16. 


76        NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

publicans  and  harlots  go  into  the  kingdom  of  God  before 
you,"  1  or  when  He  charges  against  them,  "  Ye  shut  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  against  men  ;  for  ye  enter  not  in  your- 
selves, neither  suffer  ye  them  that  are  entering  in  to 
enter." 2  The  same  inference  belongs  to  Christ's  approving 
response  to  the  scribe,  ''Thou  art  not  far  from  the  king- 
dom of  God."  2  It  is  by  no  means  to  be  supposed  that 
proximity  in  the  sense  of  time  or  place  is  mentioned 
here.  The  evident  reference  is  to  inner  disposition,  and 
so  the  kingdom  is  conceived  as  a  present  and  spirit- 
ual reality.  This  character  is  likewise  very  distinctly 
assigned  to  the  kingdom  in  the  condition  that  is  speci- 
fied for  entrance,  that  of  being  converted  and  becoming 
as  little  children.^  A  parallel  significance  belongs  to  the 
injunction  and  promise,  '*  Seek  ye  first  His  kingdom  and 
His  righteousness ;  and  all  these  things  shall  be  added 
unto  you."  ^  Here  it  is  the  one  who  seeks,  and  pre- 
sumably gains  the  kingdom,  that  is  represented  as  author- 

_jzed  to  put  aside  anxiety  about  temporal  necessities. 
The  kingdom  therefore  is  placed  under  the  category  of 
a  personal  and  present  possession  —  an  inference  which 
is  supported,  so  far  as  Matthew's  version  is  concerned, 
by  the  coupling  of  righteousness  with  the  kingdom  as  an 

_ object  of  pursuit.  As  little  is  the  coming  of  the  king- 
dom put  off  to  a  future  crisis  in  the  words  with  which 
Christ  replied  to  a  Pharisaic  calumny,  "  If  I  by  the 
Spirit  of  God  cast  out  devils,  then  is  the  kingdom  of  God 
come  unto  you."  ^  This  imports  that  a  driving  out  of 
devils,  an  abridgment  of  the  evil  kingdom,  is  equivalent 

1  Matt.  xxi.  31.  3  Mark  xii.  34.  ^  Matt.  vi.  33 ;  Luke  xii.  31. 

2  Matt,  xxiii.  13.       *  Matt,  xviii.  1-4.     ^  Matt.  xii.  28;  Luke  xi.  20. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  ^7 

to  that  extent  to  an  introduction  of  the  divine  kingdom. 

'  Again  the  Ust  of  parables  in  which  the  kingdom  is  lik- 
ened to  the  mysterious  sprouting  and  growth  of  grain 
sown  in  a  field,  to  the  development  of  a  mustard  seed 
into  a  large  plant,  and  to  the  working  of  the  minute  sub- 
stance of  leaven  through  whole  measures  of  meal,^  dis- 
tinctly favors  the  thought  of  the  kingdom  as  a  present 
and  gradually  unfolding  reality.  Likewise  the  compari- 
"son  of  the  kingdom  to  a  treasure  hid  in  the  field,  for 
which  a  man  gladly  barters  all  his  possessions,^  or  to  a 
goodly  pearl  which  the  merchantman  values  above  his 
whole  stock  besides,^  manifestly  makes  the  kingdom  a 
present   means   of  personal  enrichment,  an  essentially 

\  spiritual  treasure.'^    -'Once  more,  the  collocation  of  peti- 

;  tions  in  the  Lord's  prayer  implies  that  the  coming  of 
the  kingdom  is  identical  with  the  doing  of  God's  will  on 

I  earth  as  it  is  done  in  heaven./    Finally,  the  sentence  of 

'  Luke  xvii.  20,  21,  "The  kingdom  of  God  cometh  not 

with  observation ;  neither  shall  they  say,  Lo,  here !  or 

There !  for  lo,  the  kingdom  of  God  is  within  you,"  is 

-  decidedly  on  the  side  of  the  spiritual  as  opposed  to  the 
apocalyptic  sense  of  the  kingdom.  It  is  true  that  the 
expression  kvTO'^  v\i(av  iariv  can  be  translated  "  is  among 
you  "  or  "in  your  midst."     But  the  rendering  given  is 

1  Mark  iv.  26-29;  Matt.  xiii.  31,  2,3-  ^  Matt.  xiii.  44. 

'  Matt.  xiii.  45,  46. 

*  On  the  substance  of  the  parabolic  teaching  Gould  well  says :  "  The 
teaching  of  the  parables  is  the  clearest  teaching  in  the  New  Testament 
in  regard  to  the  manner  of  establishing  the  kingdom,  and  this  teaching 
is  clearly  at  variance  with  the  supposition  of  a  sudden  or  early  winding 
up  of  the  world's  affairs."  (Biblical  Theology  of  the  New  Testament, 
p.  47-) 


78  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

quite  as  agreeable  to  the  antecedent  statement.  It  is  to 
be  noticed,  moreover,  that  the  alternative  translation 
does  not  eUminate  from  the  passage  a  spiritual  concep- 
tion of  the  kingdom.  If  the  kingdom  was  among  tho^^e 
addressed  by  Christ,  and  yet  undiscovered  by  them,  the 
inference  would  be  that  it  was  rather  a  spiritual  domin- 
ion than  an  external  visible  kingdom  ushered  in  by 
power.i  Our  conclusion  then  is  that  it  is  a  decidedly 
faulty  exegesis  which  supposes  that  the  spiritual  aspect 
was  overshadowed  in  Christ's  thought  or  teaching  by  the 
apocalyptic.  So  strongly  is  the  former  inculcated  in  the 
1  Gospels  that  consistency  can  be  given  to  Christ's  teach- 
I  ing  as  a  whole  only  on  the  supposition  that  He  meant  to 
I  indicate  by  the  apocalyptic  picture  the  fact  that  the 
ethico-religious  process  going  on  in  the  world  is  to  reach 
a  decisive  consummation  and  have  its  results  perfectly 
manifested. 
"^  So  comprehensive  a  theme  naturally  provided  for  a 
variety  of  representations.  Viewed  as  to  its  source  and 
central  principle,  the  kingdom  is  the  realized  moral  rule 
of  God  ;  viewed  as  to  the  relations  of  its  subjects,  it  is 
an  ideal  society.  Regarded  as  a  sum  of  spiritual  goods 
which  accompany  or  result  from  the  realized  rule  of  God, 
the  kingdom  can  be  spoken  of  as  a  treasure  to  be  received ; 
regarded  as  the  domain  where  a  divine  and  heavenly 
regime  obtains,  it  can  be  described  as  a  province  or 
sphere  which  is  to  be  entered.  As  already  inaugurated 
and  in  process  of  development,  the  kingdom  is  here  and 

1  Compare  Klopper,  Zeitschrift  fiir  wissenschaftliche  Theologie,  40th 
year,  3d  number;  Bacon,  The  Beginnings  of  Gospel  Story;  Sharman,  The 
Teaching  of  Jesus  about  the  Future. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  79 

now ;  as  awaiting  a  great  consummating  stage  it  is  yet 
to  come.  Obviously  these  various  aspects  need  not  be 
regarded  as  necessarily  involving  any  contradiction. 
'^  With  the  spiritual  character  of  the  kingdom,  as  recog- 
nized in  Christ's  thought,  there  was  naturally  associated 
a  free  attitude  toward  the  Mosaic  law,  a  qualifying  of  the 
distinction  between  Jew  and  Gentile,  a  bent  to  religious 
universalism.  He  did  not  indeed  make  any  formal 
declaration  that  the  time  had  come  for  setting  aside  the 
Mosaic  law.  Nevertheless  He  gave  a  distinct  stress  to 
the  new  cast  of  the  kingdom,  as  in  the  parables  on  the 
wine-skins  and  the  garment.  Moreover  He  enumerated 
principles  which  as  good  as  abrogated  parts  of  the 
ancient  code.  If  what  He  said  about  the  powerlessness 
of  things  external  to  defile  a  man  were  to  be  accepted, 
then  a  considerable  section  of  the  Levitical  legislation^ 
must  seem  to  have  a  very  slight  ground  for  continued 
subsistence.  If  his  instructions  on  the  subject  of  divorce 
were  to  be  taken  as  authoritative,  then  Deut.  xxiv.  i,  2 
must  needs  be  reckoned  as  obsolete.  The  lordship  which 
He  claimed  over  the  Sabbath  may  also  be  regarded  as  a 
hint  that  to  His  consciousness  the  legal  system  of  Israel 
did  not  possess  finality.  An  outlook  passing  quite  beyond 
an  exclusive  Judaism  was  moreover  indicated  in  the  speci- 
fication in  the  parable  of  the  sower,  that  the  Son  of 
Man  is  the  sower,  and  the  field  is  the  world.^  With 
this  sentence  may  be  joined  many  others  which  are  in 
like  manner  indicative  of  a  transcendence  of  Jewish 
boundaries.  We  need  not  repeat  them  here,  for  we 
gave  a  list  of  them  while  attempting  in  the  first  section 

1  Lev.  xi.-xv.  2  Matt.  xiii.  37,  38. 


8o  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

of  this  chapter  to  establish  the  Christian  universalism  of 
Matthew's  Gospel.  There  is  one  passage,  it  is  true, 
which  might  be  thought  to  make  for  the  perpetuity  of 
the  Mosaic  law  in  all  its  details.  In  the  sermon  on  the 
mount  Christ  is  reported  to  have  said  that  He  came  not 
to  destroy  the  law  but  to  fulfill,  and  that  not  one  jot  or 
tittle  of  the  law  shall  pass  away  till  all  be  accomplished.^ 
But  an  isolated  passage  like  this  cannot  be  allowed  to 
nullify  the  force  of  multiplied  statements.  If  the  words 
are  to  be  accepted  as  correctly  reported,  it  is  necessary 
that  they  should  not  be  taken  in  their  bald  verbal  sense. 
We  shall  not  be  at  fault  perhaps  in  construing  them  as 
a  strong  rhetorical  expression  for  the  twofold  truth  that 
Christ  had  no  intention  to  carry  on  His  reform  by  the 
method  of  excision  from  the  ancestral  code,  and  that  the 
real  intent  of  that  code,  its  essential  religious  purpose, 
should  have  complete  fulfillment  in  the  kingdom  pro- 
claimed by  Himself.2  Christ's  declaration  is  not  that 
everything  in  the  law  will  perpetually  be  obligatory  in 
the  letter,  but  that  nothing  in  the  law  shall  fall  short  of 
fulfillment.  That  the  fulfillment  was  actually  achieved 
will  not  be  denied  by  anyone  who  duly  considers  how 
the  whole  ideal  aim  and  striving  of  the  Old  Testament 
dispensation  came  to  realization  in  the  truth  and  grace 
of  which  Christ  was  the  bearer  and  the  expression. 

iMatt.  V.  17-19.     Compare  Luke  xvi.  17. 

2  "  He  fulfills,"  says  Bruce, "  by  realizing  in  theory  and  practice  an  ideal 
to  which  Old  Testament  institutions  and  revelations  point,  but  which  they 
do  not  actually  express.  Therefore  in  fulfilling  He  necessarily  abrogates 
in  effect,  while  repudiating  the  spirit  of  a  destroyer.  He  brings  in  a  law 
of  the  spirit  which  cancels  the  law  of  the  letter,  a  kingdom  which  realizes 
prophetic  ideals,  while  setting  aside  the  crude  details  of  their  conception 
of  the  Messianic  time."     (The  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  I.  104.) 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  8 1 

The  conditions  of  entrance,  as  laid  down  in  the 
Gospels,  correspond  with  the  spirituality  and  univer- 
'sality  of  the  kingdom.  Repentance  is  clearly  indicated 
as  one  of  the  foremost  conditions.  The  disciples  of 
Christ  going  forth  under  His  instructions  are  said  to 
have  preached  that  men  should  repent.^  Christ  described 
it  as  a  part  of  His  vocation  to  call  sinners  to  repentance,^ 
and  declared  that  there  is  joy  in  heaven  over  one  sinner 
that  repenteth.^  Not  less  distinctly  he  indicated  the 
necessity  of  faith.  His  initial  message  as  reported  by 
Mark  was  "repent  ye,  and  believe  in  the  gospel."*  To 
the  woman  who  washed  His  feet  with  her  tears  He  said, 
**Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee,  go  in  peace."  ^  To  the 
Syrophoenician  woman,  to  blind  Bartiraaeus,  and  to  the 
woman  with  an  issue  of  blood  He  gave  a  gracious 
response  according  to  their  faith,^  bestowing  indeed  in 
these  instances  temporal  benefits,  but  certainly  convey- 
ing an  impression  by  His  emphatic  words  that  no  sort  of 
divine  benefit  would  be  denied  to  faith,  and  that  it  must 
be  the  key  to  the  kingdom.  As  much  as  this  is  signified 
in  His  pithy  declaration,  *'A11  things  are  possible  to  him 
that  believeth."'^  And  what  else  is  it  than  the  method 
of  faith  which  He  commends  for  gaining  what  God  has 
to  give,  when.  He  says,  "  Ask  and  it  shall  be  given  you .?  "^ 

The  Synoptical  representation,  then,  makes  repentance 
and  faith  the  principal  conditions  of  entrance  into  the 
kingdom,  and  the  major  stress  seems  to  be  placed  upon 

^Mark  vi.  12.  ^  Luke  vii.  50. 

2  Luke  V.  32.  6 Matt.  xv.  28,  Mark  x.  52  ;  Matt.  ix.  22. 

8  Luke  XV.  7.  '  Mark  ix.  23. 

*  Mark  i.  15.  8  Matt.  vii.  7. 


82  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

faith.  The  fact  that  where  the  two  are  named  in  con- 
junction repentance  stands  first  is  no  token  that  it  has  a 
logical  priority.  The  order  followed  in  the  gospel  state- 
ments may  be  regarded  as  the  homiletical  order.  Under 
certain  conditions  the  preacher  may  very  properly  begin 
with  insisting  upon  the  need  of  repentance.  Still  in  the 
logical  order  faith  is  the  prius  of  repentance.  It  is  the 
positive  side  of  the  total  transaction  of  which  repentance 
is  the  negative.  The  latter  is  the  turning  away  from  the 
soiled  and  imperfect.  But  no  one  gains  any  effective 
incentive  to  this  turning  away  except  through  an  appre- 
ciative vision  of  something  better.  He  must  perceive 
and  give  at  least  initial  assent  to  a  higher  ideal  in  order 
to  motive  and  strength  for  parting  from  the  lower. 
Now  this  initial  assent,  or  inner  movement  toward  self- 
committal,  is  faith  begun.  The  positive  force,  or  motive- 
power,  is  thus  with  faith,  and  repentance  is  logically 
secondary. 

No  definition  of  faith  is  recorded  to  have  been  given 
by  Christ.  But  if  He  does  not  define  He  describes,  and 
He  leaves  no  doubt  as  to  the  true  character  of  faith  as  a 
religious  potency.  The  a  fortiori  argument  which  He 
builds  on  the  willingness  of  earthly  parents  to  give  good 
gifts  to  their  children.  His  stress  upon  the  right  and  the 
duty  of  untroubled  reliance  upon  the  heavenly  Father's 
care  when  once  His  kingdom  has  been  made  the  first 
concern.  His  commendation  of  the  publican's  prayer, 
and  His  insistence  upon  the  childlike  disposition,  clearly 
imply  that  by  faith  He  meant  a  filial,  humble,  earnest 
spirit  of  self-committal  to  God.  It  is  legitimate  to  add 
that  He  regarded  the  message  of  which  He  Himself  was 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  83 

the  bearer  as  especially  inviting  and  obligating  to  this 
self-committal. 

The  kingdom  which  Christ  proclaimed  was  not  form- 
ally styled  a  kingdom  of  grace.  It  is  not  difficult, 
however,  to  discover  that  it  was  conceived  to  be  of  that 
character.  Doubtless  not  a  little  was  said  by  Christ 
about  work  and  reward.  As  reported  by  Matthew,  He 
declared  in  so  many  words  that  the  Son  of  Man  would 
render  to  every  man  according  to  his  deeds,^  and  in  His 
picture  of  the  great  assize  He  described  the  awards  as 
being  made  according  to  this  principle.^  But  in  all  this 
there  is  no  denial  of  grace  or  gratuitous  favor.  In  all 
earnest  religious  oratory  a  like  strain  ever  recurs.  It  is 
found  with  Paul  notwithstanding  his  vehement  repudia- 
tion of  salvation  by  works.  The  truth  is  that  deeds  are 
tokens  of  the  character  upon  which  destiny  hinges,  and 
that  a  wholesome  incentive  to  the  formation  of  a  right 
character  is  imparted  to  the  average  man  by  the  dis- 
closure that  at  the  end  of  one  order  of  deeds  great 
reward  lies,  and  at  the  end  of  another  dire  loss  and 
punishment.  In  popular  address,  therefore,  it  is  natural 
to  put  emphatically  the  notion  of  work  and  reward.  So 
Christ  did.  Nevertheless  His  total  representation  is  far 
from  paying  tribute  to  the  servile  and  legal  conception  of 
salvation.  !  He  imposed  no  system  of  austerities,  leaving 
I  such  a  matter  as  fasting  to  the  option  of  His  followers.^ 
(  He  commended  no  strained  scheme  of  self-denial,  no  form 
of  self-imposed  hardship  as  having  saving  virtue  in  itself.* 

1  xvi.  27.  2  Matt.  XXXV.  34-45. 

*  Matt.  ix.  14,  15;  Mark  ii.  18-20;  Luke  v.  33-35. 

*  The  reqmrement  which  Christ  laid  upon  the  rich  young  man,  to 


84  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

He  represented  the  acquisition  of  spiritual  goods  as  the 
result  simply  of  using  a  treasure  primarily  committed  by 
the  Lord  to  men  and  not  gained  by  their  activity.^  He 
excluded  boasting  over  one's  doings  by  instructing  His 
disciples  to  still  reckon  themselves  unprofitable  servants 
after  having  done  all  that  was  commanded.^  He  spoke 
of  the  kingdom  as  a  gift  bestowed  by  the  Father's  good 
pleasure.^  In  His  stress  upon  faith  and  His  indication 
of  its  nature  He  as  much  as  inculcated  that  it  is  the 
child,  not  the  hireling,  that  God  v/ants  and  is  ready  to 
bless.  /  By  the  parable  of  the  prodigal  son  He  made  it 
as  clear  as  the  day  that  it  is  the  Father's  love  and  not 
man's  merit  which  is  the  great  source  of  benefits,  and 
that  this  love  only  asks  for  the  receptive  subject.  '  By 
His  own  practice  of  consulting  only  the  need  and  recep- 
tivity of  the  wretched  and  the  outcast  he  illustrated  most 
vividly  the  truth  that  the  kingdom  which  He  represented 
was  a  kingdom  of  grace.  His  picture  therefore  of  work 
and  reward,  when  viewed  in  the  light  of  His  entire  teach- 


sell  all  his  property  and  give  to  the  poor,  is  obviously  not  to  be  taken 
as  a  sign  of  a  legal  or  monastic  point  of  view.  The  requirement  was  of 
the  nature  of  a  special  test  such  as  was  suitable  to  the  moral  condition 
of  that  individual.  No  similar  test,  so  far  as  we  know,  was  imposed 
upon  Zacchaeus  or  any  other.  Jesus  had  an  acute  sympathy  with 
the  poor ;  but  He  did  not  discountenance  private  property  or  magnify  the 
virtue  of  its  renunciation.  The  blessing  which  in  Luke's  version  of  the 
beatitudes  is  pronounced  upon  the  poor,  if  it  is  taken  as  the  original, 
must  be  regarded  as  signifying  not  that  the  poor  have  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  because  of  their  poverty,  but  that  in  spite  of  all  the  distresses 
of  poverty  they  are  to  be  counted  blessed,  inasmuch  as  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  so  fully  accessible  to  them  in  answer  to  their  humility  and 
faith. 

1  Matt.  XXV.  14-30.        2  Luke  xvii.  10.         ^  Luke  xii.  32. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  85 

ing,  is  seen  to  have  no  affiliation  with  a  mercenary  type  of 
piety.  Back  of  it  is  the  understanding  that  the  one  who 
works  and  is  rewarded  must  have  the  spirit  of  the  child 
and  not  of  the  hireling,  and  that  above  and  behind  all 
work  and  reward  is  the  benevolent  will  of  the  heavenly 
Father. 

A  few  sentences  in  Christ's  discourses  might  seem  to 
favor  the  notion  that  grace  makes  an  independent  or 
arbitrary  choice  of  subjects.  This  is  more  especially 
true  of  Mark  iv.  11,  12,  where  Christ  says  to  His  disciples: 
"  Unto  you  is  given  the  mystery  of  the  kingdom  of  God ; 
but  unto  them  that  are  without  all  things  are  done  in 
parables ;  that  seeing  they  may  see,  and  not  perceive ; 
and  hearing  they  may  hear  and  not  understand ;  lest 
haply  they  should  turn  again,  and  it  should  be  forgiven 
them."  In  respect  of  this  passage  it  is  to  be  noticed  in 
the  first  place  that  the  parallel  verses  in  Matthew  repre- 
sent Christ's  method  of  speaking  as  chosen  not  for  the 
purpose  of  producing  blindness,  but  because  of  already 
existing  blindness.  "  Whosoever  hath,"  it  is  said,  "  to  him 
shall  be  given,  and  he  shall  have  abundance  ;  but  whoso- 
ever hath  not,  from  him  shall  be  taken  away  even  that 
which  he  hath.  Therefore  speak  I  to  them  in  parables; 
because  seeing  they  see  not,  and  hearing  they  hear  not, 
neither  do  they  understand."  ^  According  to  this  ver- 
sion there  is  no  purpose  expressed  to  withhold  a  real 
treasure  from  any  party,  but  simply  a  declaration  that 
men  are  dealt  with  according  to  their  receptivity.  In 
the  second  place  it  is  to  be  observed  that  if  Mark's  ver- 
sion be  accepted,  the  purpose  which  it  records  must  be 

1  Matt.  xiii.  12,  13. 


86  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

regarded  as  proximate  rather  than  ultimate.  Retribu- 
tion for  insensibility  may  be  indicated,  but  as  respects 
the  great  mass  of  those  referred  to  it  is  incredible  that 
anything  more  than  a  temporary  forfeiture  of  the  proper 
gospel  benefit  could  have  been  meant.  Christ's  teach- 
ing respecting  His  mission  to  seek  and  to  save  the  lost, 
and  respecting  the  value  to  the  heavenly  Father  of  even 
one  straying  soul,  makes  it  unthinkable  that  He  wished 
any  company  of  men  to  be  given  over  to  permanent 
blindness  and  obduracy.  Moreover,  we  seem  to  be 
required  by  the  tenor  of  the  New  Testament  to  conclude 
that  His  disciples  were  being  educated  to  serve,  after 
His  departure,  as  the  bearers  of  His  gracious  message 
to  the  general  body  of  the  Jewish  people,  and  therefore 
to  the  multitude  contemplated  by  the  words  in  question. 
Thus  the  conditions  exclude  the  thought  of  an  arbitrary 
or  irreversible  rejection  which  might  be  suggested  by 
the  form  of  words  in  Mark's  version.  It  should  be 
noted,  too,  that  in  Mark's  account  of  the  speaking  in 
parables  there  is  a  hint  of  benevolent  intent.  Jesus 
spoke  the  word,  it  it  said,  to  the  people  in  parables,  *'  as 
they  were  able  to  hear  it."  ^ 

The  sense  in  which  Christ  acknowledged  the  notion 
of  election  is  clearly  indicated  in  the  parable  of  the 
marriage  feast .^  At  the  close  of  that  parable  it  is  said, 
"few  are  chosen;"  but  it  is  said  also  that  "many  are 
called,"  and  the  tenor  of  the  story  shows  plainly  that  it 
was  nothing  but  lack  of  response  to  a  cordial  invitation 
which  kept  the  majority  from  participation  in  the  feast. 
In  fine  it  empties  out  substance  and  sincerity  from  the 

1  Mark  iv.  33.  2  Matt.  xxii.  1-14. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  8/ 

gospel  message  to  suppose  that  Christ  conceived  the 
grace  of  the  kingdom  which  He  proclaimed  to  be  under 
the  bonds  and  fetters  of  an  arbitrary  election.  The  elect 
in  His  view  were  elected  not  merely  to  personal  salva- 
tion, but  to  the  office  of  extending  salvation  as  far  as 
possible,  called  to  be  the  light  of  the  world  and  the  salt 
of  the  earth. 

We  mentioned  among  the  distinctive  features  of 
Christ's  teaching  the  inseparable  union  which  it  incul- 
cates between  the  ethical  and  the  religious,  a  union 
which  does  not  permit  the  former  ever  to  be  sacrificed 
in  the  name  of  the  latter.  This  truth  is  pertinent  to  the 
present  connection,  as  reminding  us  that  the  doctrine  of 
the  gracious  character  of  the  kingdom  has  no  sort  of 
affinity  with  the  notion  of  indifference  on  the  divine  side, 
but  subsists  in  the  gospel  scheme  right  alongside  of 
a  mighty  stress  upon  the  ethical  ideal.  These  two  ele- 
ments, the  unbending  ideal,  on  the  one  hand,  to  which 
a  man  is  solemnly  bound  to  conform,  and  the  grace,  on 
the  other  hand,  which  appeals  to  confidence,  saves  from 
despair,  and  rescues  in  spite  of  ill-desert,  are  in  their 
close  union  and  reciprocal  action  distinctive  of  the  gospel 
and  principal  sources  of  its  virtue.  Neither  can 'be  put 
out  of  sight  without  detriment.  As  Sabatier  has  said, 
"  To  decompose  the  gospel  salt  is  to  destroy  its  savor.  "^ 

VI.  —  Leading  Conceptions  of  God  as  Set  Forth 
BY  Christ. 

Old  and  new  were  combined  on  this  theme.     Out  of  j 

1  Outlines  of  a  Philosophy  of  Religion,  p.  164. 


(Mjx  /  tP:^  V\  V  ' 


88  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  treasury  of  Jewish  thought  came  such  lofty  elements 
in  the  conception  of  God  as  His  absolute  supremacy, 
His  distinct  personality,  and  His  ethical  intensity.  The 
teaching  of  Christ  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels,  While  remote 
from  formal  theologizing,  distinctly  implies  every  one  of 
these  elements.  He  represented  God  as  One  with  whom 
all  things  are  possible,  and  evidently  conceived  that  every- 
thing both  small  and  great  in  nature  rests  in  His  hand. 
To  Christ's  consciousness  nothing  was  more  thoroughly 
certain  than  the  reality  of  fellowship  with  the  Father  as 
of  one  person  with  another.  Not  one  trace  of  pantheistic 
vagueness  can  be  found  in  His  speech.  No  more  does 
His  point  of  view  show  any  affiliation  with  deistic  remote- 
ness and  indifference.  It  is  a  God  thoroughly  alive  to 
the  conduct  and  character  of  men,  ethically  intense,  that 
His  discourse  pictures. 

'  But  with  all  this  appropriation  of  conceptions  from 
the  higher  ranges  of  law  and  prophecy,  the  teaching  of 
Christ  makes  a  decided  impression  of  newness.  It  seems 
to  transport  one  into  an  atmosphere  and  a  territory  quite 
other  than  those  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  explana- 
tion of  this  impression  lies  in  the  fact  that  Christ's 
exposition  of  the  thought  of  God  flowed  out  of  His 
unique  consciousness  of  sonship.  No  sage  or  prophet 
in  Israel  ever  had  anything  like  an  equivalent  of  that 
conciousness.  As  has  been  noticed.  He  knew  Himself 
as  the  well-beloved  Son,  having  unhindered  access  to  the 
Father,  and  dwelling  habitually  in  the  light  of  His  com- 
placent love.  Dowered  with  a  supreme  sense  of  sonship 
He  was  prepared  to  be  in  a  supreme  way  the  expositor 
of  divine  fatherhood.     His  exposition  was  not  a  specula- 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  89 

tion  but  a  shining  forth  of  the  light  that  was  within 
Him. 

This  was  the  view  with  which  Christ  illuminated  the 
religious  landscape  —  this  vivid,  warmly-colored  repre- 
sentation of  God  as  the  Father  in  heaven.  The  name 
of  Father,  it  is  true,  had  long  had  a  place  among  the 
terms  with  which  Israelitish  thought  described  the  Divine 
Being.  But  in  the  usage  of  the  Hebrew  Testament  the 
name  was  descriptive  rather  of  a  national  than  an  indi- 
vidual relation.  It  was  the  nation  to  which  Jehovah 
stood  in  the  character  of  Father,  or  possibly  the  king  as 
the  representative  of  the  nation.  Seldom  did  the  thought 
gain  expression  that  the  individual  is  privileged  to  address 
the  Holy  One  as  Father.  A  suggestion  of  such  a  privi- 
lege was  indeed  contained  in  one  and  another  sentence, 
especially  in  the  words  of  the  Psalm,  "  Like  as  a  father 
pitieth  his  children,  so  the  Lord  pitieth  them  that  fear 
Him."  ^  A  step  beyond  this,  at  least  as  regards  verbal 
approach  to  the  gospel,  is  observable  in  the  Apocrypha. 
In  Ecclesiasticus  occurs  the  appeal,  "  O  Lord,  Father  and 
Master  of  my  life,"  2  and  in  the  Book  of  Wisdom  it  is 
intimated  that  the  righteous  man  may  be  termed  a  son 
of  God.3     Still  the  adequate,  unequivocal,  inspiring  assur- 

1  Psalm  ciii.  13.     Compare  Hos.  i.  10;  Isa.  i,  2,  Ixiii.  16  ;  Mai.  ii.  10. 

2  Ecclesiasticus  xxiii.  i,  4. 

8  Wisdom  ii.  18.  (Compare  Psalms  of  Solomon,  xiii.  9.)  This  logi- 
cally implies  that  God  stands  in  a  fatherly  relation  to  the  individual. 
The  direct  appeal  to  God  as  Father  is  nevertheless  wanting.  Instances 
of  such  appeal  were  evidently  very  rare  till  after  the  appearance  of  the 
New  Testament.  •'  In  Palestinian  circles,"  says  Dalman,  "  in  harmony 
with  the  Old  Testament  view,  it  is  generally  the  Israelites  as  such  who 
have  God  in  relation  to  themselves  as   '  their  father.'  ...      In  the 


90  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ance  of  the  fatherly  relation  of  God  to  the  individual 
first  came  when  Christ  out  of  the  fullness  of  His  own 
filial  consciousness  talked  of  the  Father.  This  name 
stood  in  his  speech  for  a  thoroughly  individual  relation. 
It  lies  in  the  whole  tenor  of  His  teachings,  as  well  as  in 
the  verbal  expression  which  He  put  into  a  formula  of 
prayer  for  the  disciple,  that  He  had  no  thought  but  that 
each  and  every  man  should  come  to  God  as  Father,  and 
cultivate  toward  Him  the  spirit  of  the  confiding  child. 

Some  discussion  has  been  expended  on  the  question 
whether  Christ  taught  the  universal  fatherhood  of  God  — 
that  is,  His  paternal  relation  to  men  generally,  whether 
spiritual  or  un spiritual,  obedient  or  disobedient.  It  must 
be  granted  that  the  Synoptical  Gospels  do  not  formally 
proclaim  such  a  relation.  Still  it  must  be  claimed  that 
the  Synoptical  representation  is  decidedly  on  the  side 
of  the  meaning  which  naturally  goes  with  the  phrase 
"  universal  fatherhood."  It  pictures  God  as  ready  to  act 
toward  men  universally  as  though  He  recognized  a 
paternal  relation  toward  them.  Christ  as  much  as 
assumed  to  know  thoroughly,  and  truly  to  represent,  the 
mind  of  God.  When  therefore  He  declared  His  voca- 
tion to  be  the  seeking  and  the  saving  of  the  lost,  and 
showed  how  His  compassion  and  solicitude  went  forth  to 
the  sinful  and  the  outcast.  He  was  giving  an  object  les- 
son on  the  essential  attitude  of  God  to  the  underserving. 
By  the  whole  tenor  of  His  ministry  He  enforced  the 

Pseudepigrapha  the  name  of  father  is  nowhere  used  as  a  designation  of 
God.  The  dicta  of  the  Rabbis,  from  the  end  of  the  first  Christian 
century  onwards,  are  the  earliest  source  of  instances."  (Words  of  Jesus, 
pp.  184-189.)     Compare  Bousset,  Die  Religion  des  Judentums,  p.  357. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  91 

lesson  which  is  to  be  gathered  from  the  story  of  the 
prodigal  son  and  the  related  parables.  It  matters  little, 
then,  that  the  formal  affirmation  of  universal  fatherhood 
is  wanting.  God  is  revealed  as  having  fatherly  compas- 
sion and  goodwill  toward  the  least  worthy,  and  so  by 
necessary  inference  toward  every  man.  He  is  the  gen- 
erous being  whose  example  of  gratuitous  kindness  to  the 
unjust  perpetually  invites  men  to  love  and  bless  their 
enemies.  He  is  the  absolutely  good,  the  ayaOo^,  whose 
benevolence  is  without  stint.  This  does  not  imply  that 
He  makes  small  account  of  distinctions  of  character. 
The  Christ  who  pictured  so  strongly  the  consequences  of 
unrepented  sin,  and  urged  the  cutting  off  of  the  right 
hand  that  offends,  had  obviously  no  place  for  such  a 
notion.  As  was  stated  above.  He  imputed  to  God  the 
full  measure  of  ethical  intensity.  It  made  no  incon- 
gruity for  His  mind  to  suppose  fatherly  compassion  and 
ethical  intensity  to  coexist.  Nor  can  it  be  seen  that 
this  point  of  view  was  illogical.  Next  to  the  actuality 
of  sonship  a  potentiality  of  sonship  is  the  most  precious 
thing  that  the  eye  of  God  discovers  among  men.  It  is 
not  inappropriate  then  for  God  to  exercise  fatherly  for- 
bearance and  pity  toward  the  sin-stained  and  unworthy 
man  who  still  has  in  himself  this  potentiality.  It  is 
worth  while  to  use  some  pains  to  prevent  this  pearl  of 
great  price  from  being  lost. 

The  proper  correlate  to  God's  fatherhood  is  of  course 
man's  sonship.  Still  an  affirmation  of  the  one  does  not 
amount  precisely  to  an  affirmation  of  the  other.  By 
reason  of  human  sinfulness  a  distinction  is  necessarily 
made  between  the  fact  and  the  potentiality  of  sonship. 


92  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

In  the  Synoptical  Gospels  there  is  an  implicit  recogni- 
tion of  this  distinction.  In  common  with  the  rest  of  the 
New  Testament  they  assume  that  it  is  through  conform- 
ity to  the  divine  pattern  that  men  gain  the  title  to  be 
called  in  the  full  and  proper  sense  sons  of  God.^  While 
God  in  His  disposition  is  constantly  the  Father,  men 
need  to  attain  to  true  sonship. 

The  dominant  representation  of  God  in  the  gospel 
gives  the  standard  for  the  conception  of  prayer.  It  is 
consistently  regarded  as  the  trustful  approach  of  the 
child  to  the  supreme  Father.  So  Christ  represented  it, 
not  only  in  the  form  of  prayer  which  He  gave  to  His 
disciples,  but  also  in  the  distinct  appeal  to  the  parental 
relation  which  he  employed  when  He  sought  to  inspire 
them  with  undoubting  confidence  in  the  presentation  of 
their  petitions.  As  may  be  judged  from  His  reproba- 
tion of  vain  repetitions,^  He  considered  it  a  senseless 
profanation  of  prayer  to  use  it  as  a  piece  of  magic  or  a 
merit-winning  performance.  He  regarded  it  rather  as 
the  simple,  unsophisticated  expression  of  desire  and  need, 
the  humble  approach  of  the  dependent  member  of  the 
great  spiritual  household  to  the  supreme  and  gracious 
Head  of  that  household. 

God  as  the  prayer-hearing  Father  could  but  be  con- 
ceived as  exercising  a  minute  and  comprehensive  provi- 
dence. Christ  took  special  pains  to  lighten  up  this 
aspect  of  divine  relations.  No  more  charming  piece  of 
''optimism  has  ever  been  embodied  in  human  speech  than 
that  contained  in  the  word-pictures  of  Christ,  which  reveal 
the  heavenly  Father  as  noting  the  fall  of  the  sparrow, 

1  Matt.  V.  45  ;  Luke  vi.  35,  xx.  36.  2  Matt,  vi.  7,  8. 


/< 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  93 

numbering  the  very  hairs  upon  the  heads  of  His  children, 
and  exercising  for  them  a  loving  foresight  which  makes 
it  unnecessary  to  borrow  an  anxious  thought  about  the 
events  of  the  morrow.  Doubtless  Christ  was  perfectly 
aware  that  the  appearance  of  divine  providence  is  not 
always  friendly.  Perhaps  in  the  parables  of  the  selfish 
neighbor  1  and  the  unjust  judge ^  He  meant  to  give  a 
suggestion  that  at  times  God  may  seem  to  take  the  un- 
heeding attitude.  In  His  own  experience  even,  for  at 
least  one  dark  moment  of  overwhelming  anguish,  He 
illustrated  how  this  cheerless  appearance  may  dominate 
the  outlook.  But  His  unequivocal  teaching  was  that 
God's  notice  and  care  extend  to  the  minutest  item  of 
human  interests,  and  He  invited  to  a  faith  vital  and  buoy- 
ant enough  to  triumph  over  every  adverse  appearance. 

In  the  postulate  of  universal  fatherhood  there  is  evi- 
dently latent  a  postulate  of  universal  brotherhood.  In 
fact  Christ  distinctly  indicated  that  the  two  were  closely 
related  in  His  mind  when  He  pointed  to  the  merciful 
Father  who  bestows  His  gifts  upon  the  undeserving  as  a 
model  for  the  conduct  of  men.  Furthermore  in  His  in- 
terpretation of  the  requirement  of  equal  love  to  the 
neighbor,  as  given  in  the  parable  of  the  good  Samaritan, 
He  plainly  signified  that  the  spirit  of  brotherly  love 
should  reach  out  to  race-wide  limits. 

VII.  —  Leading  Conceptions  of  Man  and  the 
World. 

In  sketching  Christ's  view  of  the  kingdom  and  of  the 

1  Luke  xi.  5-9.  ^  Luke  xviii.  1-8. 


94 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Father  in  heaven  we  have  already  intimated  the  most 
essential  elements  in  His  teaching  respecting  man.  To 
His  contemplation  man  was  above  all  a  child  of  God  and 
a  subject  of  His  kingdom  of  righteousness.  This  was 
the  ideal  which  He  regarded  as  at  least  potential  in 
every  man,  and  in  the  light  of  which  he  estimated  man's 
worth. 

Among  the  tokens  which  Christ  gave  of  His  sense  of 
man's  worth  was  the  stress  which  He  placed  upon  the 
individual  considered  by  himself,  or  stripped  of  all  ex- 
traneous recommendations.  No  poverty  or  social  abject- 
ness  removed  a  man  in  the  least  degree  beyond  the  pale 
of  His  sympathy.  Any  one,  however  circumstanced, 
who  was  disposed  to  do  the  will  of  God,  He  received  into 
cordial  fellowship  and  pronounced  worthy  to  be  owned 
as  mother,  sister,  and  brother.  To  lose  the  individual 
in  the  mass  He  regarded  as  diametrically  opposed  to 
divine  procedure.  However  great  the  number  in  the 
fold,  the  one  straying  sheep  must  be  sought  after  and 
the  finding  of  the  lost  one  makes  the  most  fitting  occa- 
sion in  the  world  for  a  jubilee. 

Again,  Christ  expressed  His  sense  of  man's  high  place 
and  worth  by  setting  before  him  as  the  goal  of  attaiB- 
ment  .  an  image  of  divine  perfection.  "  Ye  therefore 
shall  be  perfect  as  your  heavenly  Father  is  perfect."  ^ 
As  the  context  indicates,  it  is  especially  the  generous, 
overflowing,  diffusive  love  of  God  that  is  to  be  copied. 
Similarly  what  is  said  of  the  obligation  of  the  disciple  to 
forgive  trespasses  and  to  seek  occasion  for  ministering, 
rather  than  for  being  ministered  unto,^  contemplates  him 

1  Matt.  V.  48.  2  Matt.  xx.  28. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING        95 

as  an  associate  and  imitator  of  the  perfect  Father  in 
heaven. 

Still  further,  Christ  attached  a  high  worth  to  man  in 
distinctly  contemplating  him  as  a  candidate  for  immor- 
tality. His  conception  of  the  interrelation  between  God 
and  man  as  that  of  Father  and  child  naturally  carried 
with  itself  a  vital  impression  of  the  vocation  of  man 
to  live  an  immortal  life.  This  is  essentially  the  point 
of  His  argument  against  the  Sadducean  negation.  It 
flashes  out  the  truth  that  the  God  who  revealed  Himself 
to  Moses  as  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  mani- 
fested thereby  that  He  had  received  these  fathers  into 
sympathetic  fellowship  with  Himself,  and  that  the  rela- 
tion between  Him  and  them  was  too  intimate  and  real 
to  allow  the  supposition  that  they  had  lapsed  into  the 
estate  of  remote  nonentities.  Those  whom  the  paternal 
God  recognizes  as  His  own  must  survive  the  stroke  of 
death.  Corresponding  to  the  living  Father  there  must 
be  living  children,  subjects  of  immortality.^ 

There  is  then  no  reason  at  all  to  doubt  that  the  ideal 
which  was  recognized  in  Christ's  habitual  thought  of 
man  was  a  very  lofty  one.  He  gave  unequivocal  testi- 
mony on  this  subject.  If  we  ask  what  was  His  estimate 
of  the  actual  condition  of  men,  we  find  the  data  for  a 
conclusion  somewhat  less  distinct.  Not  a  statement  can 
be  found  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels  which  sounds  much 
like  the  definite  specifications  of  later  times  on  original 
sin  or  innate  depravity.  Indeed  were  the  words  of 
Christ,  which  affirmed  respecting  little  children,  "of 
such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  ^  to  be  taken  unquali- 

iMatt.  xxii.  32  ;  Mark  xii.  26,  27  ;  Luke  xx.  37,  38.  ^^att.  xix.  14. 


96  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

fiedly,  the  conclusion  would  be  that  birth  into  this  world 
brings  no  entail  of  sin  or  depravity.  But  the  warrant  is 
not  clear  for  taking  the  words  in  so  large  a  sense. 
Christ  saw  in  the  simplicity  and  unsophisticated  trust- 
fulness of  little  children  beautiful  traits  which  ought  to 
characterize  mature  life,  and  he  undoubtedly  regarded 
such  subjects  as  embraced  in  God's  kindly  thought  and 
standing  within  the  bounds  of  the  kingdom  rather  than 
outside.  But  that  does  not  necessarily  imply  that  He 
regarded  these  innocent  and  uncondemned  citizens  of 
the  kingdom  as  having  no  tendencies  by  birth  which 
would  jeopardize  their  continuous  standing  in  the  king- 
dom and  their  unfoldment  in  harmony  with  its  standard. 
He  might  have  used  just  the  words  that  He  did,  and 
still  have  held  the  conviction  that  man  is  so  far  by  birth 
inclined  to  sin  that  he  needs  to  be  met  on  the  threshold 
of  moral  activity  by  the  regenerating  agency  of  the 
Divine  Spirit.  The  author  of  the  fourth  Gospel  quite 
distinctly  imputes  to  Him  this  conviction.  The  Synopti- 
cal representation,  too,  if  falling  short  of  an  affirmation, 
contains  at  least  a  suggestion  that  Christ's  thought  took 
account  of  an  element  of  moral  infirmity  and  bondage  in 
man's  natural  condition.  In  the  line  of  this  suggestion 
is  the  contrast  which  is  drawn  between  the  divine  and 
the  human  in  the  question :  *'  If  ye  then,  being  evil, 
know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children,  .how 
much  more  shall  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven  give 
good  things  to  them  that  ask  Him.?"^  This  language 
seems  to  take  for  granted  that  those  addressed  admitted 
the  common  sinfulness  of  men.     A  like  implication  may 

iMatt.  vii.  II. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING        97 

be  discovered  in  what  is  said  of  the  facility  with  which 
men  enter  into  the  broad  as  opposed  to  the  narrow  way.i 
The  same  may  be  said  of  the  stress  put  upon  repentance 
and  upon  the  necessity  of  turning  or  being  converted  in 
order  to  gain  entrance  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ^  It 
is  true  that  in  each  of  these  instances  Christ  pictured 
the  actual  moral  state  which  is  characteristic  of  grown 
men,  and  did  not  definitely  assert  that  any  part  of  the 
evil  in  that  state  is  a  matter  of  birth  or  inheritance. 
Still  when  we  consider  the  trend  both  of  Jewish  and 
apostolic  thinking,  the  more  natural  supposition  is  that 
Christ  thought  of  the  proneness  of  men  to  go  astray  as 
being  in  some  measure  an  inborn  tendency.  His  concep- 
tion was  not  of  the  sombre  Augustinian  order.  Neither 
was  it  of  the  Pelagian  type.  He  regarded  man  as  a 
mixed  subject,  having  in  himself  the  potentiality  of  a 
lofty  ideal,  but  possessed  also  of  wayward  impulses, 
needing  to  pray  habitually  for  forgiveness,  and  to  watch 
incessantly  against  the  wily  assaults  of  evil. 

It  may  be  noticed,  in  respect  of  Christ's  terminology 
as  reported  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels,  that  it  less  defi- 
nitely associates  the  moral  evil  in  men  with  the  flesh 
than  is  characteristic  of  the  Pauline  and  the  Johannine 
representation.  The  nearest  approach  to  the  phraseology 
of  these  later  types  is  contained  in  the  sentence,  "  Watch 
and  pray  that  ye  enter  not  into  temptation  :  the  spirit 
indeed  is  willing,  but  the  flesh  is  weak."  ^  This  is  as 
much  as  saying  that  the  characteristic  infirmity  of  man, 
or  his  susceptibility  to  temptation,  is  closely  associated 
with  the  flesh  as  tending  under  certain  conditions  to 

iMatt.  vii.  13,  14.  2  Matt,  xviii.  3.  ^Matt.  xxvi.  41. 


98  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

lassitude.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  it  is  not  to  be 
overlooked  that  Christ  strongly  accentuated  the  truth 
that  the  heart,  as  the  centre  of  the  moral  personality,  is 
the  source  of  all  the  varieties  of  wickedness  that  come  to 
manifestation  in  conduct .^  This  is  the  distinctive  point 
of  view  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels.  The  association  of 
sin  with  the  flesh  is  decidedly  subordinate. 

For  the  Christ  who  admitted  so  much  of  brightness 
into  His  thought  of  God  and  man  in  their  mutual  rela- 
tions it  was  not  natural  to  take  a  dark  view  of  the  world. 
He  regarded  it  with  a  measure  of  sympathy  and  appre- 
ciation for  which  there  was  scanty  precedent  in  Jewish 
thought  and  representation  in  the  times  proximate  to 
His  own  age.  Many  touches  in  His  discourses  show 
that  nature  had  to  Him  the  worth  of  visible  poetry.  He 
saw  upon  it  the  light  of  His  Father's  countenance,  and 
recognized  in  its  varied  forms  tokens  of  His  care  and 
painstaking.  The  gospel  representation,  it  is  true,  sug- 
gests that  Christ's  vision  of  the  world  was  not  without 
its  shadowed  side.  He  recognized  the  presence  of  an 
enemy  who  sows  tares  in  the  Lord's  field.  His  language 
implies  that  He  confessed  that  there  was  much  of  truth 
in  the  current  Jewish  conception  respecting  the  working 
of  Satan  and  his  minions.  But  this  recognition  of  a 
hostile  force  did  not  interfere  with  a  predominant  cheer- 
fulness in  His  outlook  upon  the  world.  He  knew  the 
hostile  force  as  one  that  quailed  before  His  own  word  of 
authority,  and  viewed  it  as  doomed  to  certain  and  utter 
defeat.     In  most  striking  and  graphic  expression  of  this 

iMatt.  XV.  i8,  19;  Mark.  vii.  20-23. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  99 

confidence    He  exclaimed,    **  I   beheld   Satan  fallen  as 
lightning  from  heaven." ' 


VIII.  —  The  Witness  of  Christ  Respecting  His 
Own  Person  and  Office. 

An  element  of  testimony  is  contained  in  the  titles  by 
which  Christ  preferred  to  designate  Himself,  among 
which  "  Son  of  Man  "  is  the  most  frequently  recurring. 
It  is  used  in  more  than  fifty  distinct  instances  in  the 
sayings  of  Christ  as  reported  by  the  Synoptists.  It  has 
often  been  urged,  and  with  a  good  degree  of  probability, 
that  Dan.  vii.  13  afforded  an  influential  precedent  as 
respects  the  use  of  this  name.  In  that  passage,  it  is 
true,  no  distinct  individual  is  certainly  specified.  *'  One 
like  a  Son  of  Man,"  it  is  said,  "  came  with  the  clouds  of 
heaven"  —  that  is,  one  in  a  human  form,  and  therefore 
representing  a  kingdom  of  a  higher  order  than  those 
symbohzed   by  the  animal    forms    previously  pictured. 

^Luke  X.  18.  As  was  intimated  in  another  connection,  on  such  a 
theme  as  the  agency  of  angels  and  demons  it  might  be  expected  that 
Christ,  to  a  considerable  extent,  would  accommodate  Himself  to  current 
forms  of  representation.  Just  how  far  He  went  in  this  accommodation 
is  a  question  that  is  difficult  to  settle.  Opinion  is  divided,  but  leans 
increasingly  to  the  conclusion  that  very  little  dogmatic  content  ought 
to  be  put  into  the  words  of  Christ  in  this  relation.  A  writer  as  little 
given  to  adventurous  criticism  as  Professor  Stevens  remarks :  "  The 
language  of  Jesus  is  pictorial  and  His  purpose  in  speaking  on  such 
topics  always  terminates  on  ethical  and  spiritual  instruction,  and  not 
on  giving  information  respecting  the  acts  of  superhuman  spirits.  .  .  . 
Whether  demon-possession  be  in  reality  a  fact  or  a  superstition,  the 
authority  of  Jesus  cannot  fairly  be  cited  for  either  the  one  or  the  other 
view  of  it."     (The  Theology  of  the  New  Testament,  pp.  90,  91.) 


100  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

But  in  proportion  as  a  vital  Messianic  expectation 
wrought  in  Israel  it  was  natural  that  the  picture  of  a 
son  of  man  should  be  made  to  denote  a  specific  person- 
ality, the  ideal  king  who  was  to  come.  If  we  may  trust 
the  conclusions  of  eminent  investigators  as  to  the  pre- 
Christian  origin  of  the  middle  portion  of  the  Book  of 
Enoch,  the  picture  of  Daniel  had  already  been  construed 
in  this  sense,  at  least  by  individuals,  before  Christ  began 
His  public  ministry.  Still  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose 
that  in  popular  thought  the  term  Son  of  Man  was  clearly 
understood  to  be  an  equivalent  of  Messiah.  It  might 
be  understood  in  that  way;  at  the  same  time  it  was  not 
so  well  naturalized  in  this  significance  as  spontaneously 
and  uniformly  to  be  so  interpreted.^  Accordingly  it  was 
admirably  adapted  to  the  use  of  Christ.  His  discretion 
warned  Him  against  an  open  proclamation  of  His  Mes- 
siahship  at  the  beginning  of  His  public  teaching.  The 
current  notion  respecting  the  office  of  the  Messiah  was 
decidedly  unlike  His  own.  An  open  assumption  of  the 
name,  therefore,  would  at  once  have  brought  upon  Him 
the  pressure  of  a  clamorous  expectation  which  He  must 
needs  disappoint  to  the  certain  embarrassment  of  His 
ministry.  The  term  Son  of  Man  was  indicative  of  a 
special  vocation,  but  its  sense  was  so  far  veiled  that  men 
were  left  to  query  whether  it  stood  precisely  for  the 
Messiah.  It  was  suggestive  without  being  too  openly 
declarative.  ^ 

1  Compare  Dalman,  Words  of  Jesus,  p.  306. 

2  Professor  Charles  concludes  that  the  Book  of  Enoch  served  as  the 
more  immediate  source  of  Christ's  characterization  of  Himself  as  the 
Son  of  Man,  but  also  that  an  altered  signification  was  given  to  the  term 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  lOI 

From  this  exposition  it  follows  that  in  calling  Himself 
the  Son  of  Man  Christ  was  employing  a  modest  and 
prudent  form  for  the  expression  of  His  Messianic  con- 
sciousness. The  central  meaning  of  the  name,  as  He 
used  it,  was  Messianic.  It  was  not  chosen  specifically 
as  a  means  of  attesting  His  sense  of  complete  partner- 
ship in  human  nature.  Nevertheless  in  a  negative  way 
it  does  bear  evidence  to  that  truth.  Christ  could  never 
have  been  partial  to  a  name  which  was  distinctly  con- 
trary to  his  self-consciousness.  His  habitual  use  of  the 
term  "  Son  of  Man "  shows  at  least  that  there  was  no 
opposition  in  his  thought  or  feeling  to  the  idea  of  genu- 
ine implication  in  the  human  race.^ 

by  importing  into  it  Isaiah's  conception  of  the  Servant  of  Jehovah. 
"  Whilst,  therefore,  in  adopting  the  title  '  the  Son  of  Man  '  from  Enoch, 
Jesus  made  from  the  outset  supernatural  claims,  yet  these  supernatural 
claims  were  to  be  vindicated  not  after  the  external  Judaistic  conceptions 
of  the  Book  of  Enoch,  but  in  a  revelation  of  the  Father  in  a  sinless  and 
redemptive  life,  death  and  resurrection  "  (Book  of  Enoch,  pp.  314-316). 
The  direct  borrowing  on  the  part  of  Jesus  from  the  pseudepigraphic 
writing  may  be  doubted,  but  His  use  of  the  title  in  question  does  in 
truth  remind  both  of  the  lofty  personality  depicted  in  the  Book  of  Enoch 
and  of  Isaiah's  suffering  servant  of  Jehovah. 

1  A  few  words  on  an  eccentric  theory  may  be  in  place,  the  theory, 
namely,  that  Jesus  never  used  the  term  Son  of  Man  "  either  to  claim 
Messiahship  in  any  sense,  or  to  hint  that  He  was  a  '  mere  man,'  or  '  the 
true  man,'  but  in  some  pregnant  utterances  used  it  in  reference  to  '  man  ' 
in  general,  his  duties,  rights,  and  privileges"  (Nathaniel  Schmidt,  The 
Prophet  of  Nazareth).  The  gi'ound  for  the  theory  is  the  contention  that 
Son  of  Man  {bar  nasha)  in  Aramaic  is  a  generic  term  for  man.  The 
contention  may  be  admitted,  and  still  the  conclusion  based  upon  it  be 
regarded  as  decidedly  incredible.  Indeed  it  is  vastly  easier  to  believe 
that  Jesus  gave  such  connections  to  the  generic  term  as  to  make  plain 
His  design  to  apply  it  in  a  specific  sense  to  Himself  than  either  that  He 
uttered  some  general  statements  about  man,  or  that  the  evangelists 


I02  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

In  applying  to  Himself  the  complementary  term  *'Son 
of  God"  (or  at  least  "the  Son"  in  connections  where 
the  sense  requires  the  name  of  God  to  be  understood) 
Christ  undoubtedly  meant  to  claim  a  relation  of  special 
fellowship  and  moral  identity  with  the  Father  in  heaven. 
He  could  not  have  meant  less  than  this.  The  tone  of 
His  teaching  implies,  it  is  true,  that  it  is  the  common 
privilege  of  men  to  be  the  sons  of  God.  But  it  is  to  be 
noticed  that  in  no  instance  does  He  place  Himself  on  a 
parity  with  men  in  general  in  respect  of  sonship.  On 
the  contrary,  the  unmistakable  import  of  the  connections 
in  which  he  names  himself  the  Son  is  that  He  enjoys 
singular  intimacy  with  the  Father  and  has  singular  pre- 
rogatives over  the  divine  kingdom.  It  may  not  be 
capable  of  proof  from  the  Synoptical  accounts  that  He 
meant  by  this  title  to  claim  sonship  in  the  metaphysical 
sense.  What  is  certain  is  that  His  use  of  the  title  in 
the  Synoptical  Gospels  indicates  a  consciousness  of  an 
unique  and  lofty  union  with  God,  and  that  a  union  so 
exceptional,  even  though  the  primary  stress  be  upon  its 
ethical  character,  is  a  congenial  basis  for  the  idea  of  a 
metaphysical  sonship. 

Beyond  the  use  of  these  titles  Christ  gave  manifold 
illustrations   of  the  order   of    self-consciousness  which 

represented  Jesus  as  customarily  using  a  form  of  self-designation  which 
he  never  employed.  The  entire  New  Testament  outside  of  the  Gospels 
testifies  by  its  mode  of  referring  to  Jesus  that  the  early  Christians  had 
no  inclination  on  their  own  account  to  name  their  Master  the  Son  of 
Man,  and  thus  supplies  a  cogent  reason  for  inferring  that  the  report  of 
the  evangelists  about  the  employment  of  the  term  by  Jesus  rested  on  a 
vital  tradition.  As  respects  the  verdict  of  New  Testament  scholarship, 
while  several  names  are  cited  in  favor  of  the  theory  in  question,  it  is 
emphatically  repudiated  by  the  majority  of  critics. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  103 

dwelt  in  Him  by  the  position  which  directly  or  indirectly 
He  assigned  to  Himself.  A  review  of  His  words  com- 
pels the  conclusion,  that,  with  all  the  tokens  He  gave  of 
real  identification  with  humanity,  His  self -consciousness 
rose  to  a  great  height  above  the  common  human  plane. 
He  makes  no  account  of  His  Davidic  lineage  and  inti- 
mates to  the  Pharisees  that  the  true  thought  of  the 
Messiah,  in  harmony  with  the  commonly  accepted  signif- 
icance of  a  sentence  in  the  Psalms,  accounts  Him 
David's  Lord.^  In  the  parable  of  the  vineyard  He 
represents  servants  of  the  owner  as  being  sent  to 
receive  the  fruits,  and  last  of  all  the  beloved  Son,^  thus 
placing  Himself  in  a  distinctly  higher  category  than  the 
prophetical  messengers  to  Israel.  In  emphasizing  the 
impossibility  of  forecasting  the  day  of  judgment.  He  notes 
that  the  day  is  hidden  from  the  knowledge  of  men, 
angels,  and  the  Son,  indicating  by  this  order  of  subjects 
His  consciousness  that  the  Son's  prerogative  stands 
above  that  of  the  whole  creaturely  universe.^  He  so 
identifies  Himself  with  the  kingdom  of  heaven  which  He 
proclaims  as  to  allow  of  no  antithesis  between  relation 
to  it  and  relation  to  Himself.  He  pronounces  those 
blessed  who  are  persecuted  for  His  sake.*  He  declares 
that  the  giving  of  a  cup  of  cold  water  in  His  name  shall 
have  its  reward.^  He  claims  love  and  allegiance  superior 
to  those  demanded  by  any  earthly  ties.^  He  represents 
that  confession  or  denial  of  Him  before  men  shall  earn 
confession  or  denial  before  the  Father  and  the  angels.^ 

1  Matt.  xxii.  45 ;   Luke  xx.  44.  2  Matt.  xxi.  33-39 ;  Luke  xx.  9-15 

*  Matt.  xxiv.  36;  Mark  xiii.  32.         *  Matt.  v.  11. 
5  Matt.  x.  42  ;  Mark  ix.  41.  6  Matt.  x.  37  ;  Luke  xiv.  26. 

■''Matt.  x.  32,  33;  Mark  viii.  38;  Luke  xii.  8,  9,  ix.  26. 


I04  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

He  pictures  the  awards  of  the  great  day  of  judgment  as 
apportioned  according  as  affection  or  despite  has  been 
shown  to  Himself.^  He  declares  Himself  greater  than 
the  temple,^  Lord  of  the  Sabbath,^  qualified  to  forgive 
sins.'*  He  characterizes  Himself  as  the  stronger  than 
the  strong  man,  the  one  able  to  vanquish  Satan.^  He 
makes  Himself  the  one  competent  revealer  of  the  mind 
of  God,  since  no  one  knoweth  the  Son  save  the  Father, 
neither  doth  any  know  the  Father  save  the  Son.^  He 
promises  to  be  in  the  midst  where  two  or  three  are 
gathered  in  His  name,^  and  to  supply  speech  and  wisdom 
to  His  disciples  when  they  shall  be  called  to  answer 
before  adversaries.^  He  utters  His  message  directly,  or 
in  His  own  name,  instead  of  employing  the  customary 
prophetical  formula,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord."  He  claims 
to  be  endowed  with  all  authority  in  heaven  and  earth.^ 
He  describes  the  angels,  whom  Jewish  thought  made  the 
retinue  of  Jehovah,  as  sent  forth  at  His  behest  and 
serving  as  His  messengers  or  servants.^^  He  represents 
finally  that  all  nations  are  to  be  gathered  before  Him  and 
to  receive  at  His  hands  the  awards  of  eternity. ^^  To 
suppose  such  a  line  of  expressions  to  come  from  a 
simple  human  consciousness,  in  one  too  clear  and  well- 
balanced  to  be  subject  to  measureless  illusion,  is  to  sup- 
pose what  our  own  experience  can  never  make  credible. 

1  Matt.  XXV.  34-46.  2  Matt.  xii.  6. 

8  Matt.  xii.  8 ;  Mark  ii.  28 ;  Luke  vi.  5. 
*Matt.  ix.  2-6;  Mark  ii.  4-10 ;  Luke  v.  20-24,  vii.  47. 
^Matt.  xii.  28,  29;  Mark  iii.  27;  Luke  xi,  21,  22. 
6  Matt.  xi.  27  ;  Luke  x.  22.  '  Matt,  xviii.  20. 

8  Luke  xxi.  15.  ^  Matt,  xxviii.  18. 

10  Matt.  xxiv.  30,  31 ;  Mark  xiii.  27.  ^i  Matt.  xxv.  31-46. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  105 

A  sane  mind  in  beings  conditioned  as  we  are  knows 
itself  to  be  vastly  remote  from  such  an  order  of  self- 
consciousness  as  is  reflected  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels. 

In  respect  of  trinitarianism  the  Synoptical  Gospels 
furnish  data  for  inference  rather  than  formal  statements. 
The  closest  verbal  approach  to  the  trinitarian  conception 
is  contained  in  the  injunction  of  baptism  as  reported  by 
Matthew.^  The  larger  basis,  however,  for  trinitarian 
conviction  is  given  in  the  total  representation  of  the 
position  and  offices  of  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 
The  heinousness  of  the  sin  against  the  latter  argues 
plainly  for  His  divine  rank.^  As  respects  the  distinct 
personality  of  the  Holy  Spirit  the  Synoptical  Gospels 
afford  no  more  explicit  indication  than  that  contained  in 
the  baptismal  injunction. 

The  redemptive  work  of  Christ  as  related  to  His 
death  is  treated  very  briefly  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels. 
The  scantiness  of  the  reference,  however,  is  no  cause  for 
surprise.  The  disciples  were  not  well  prepared  for  a 
message  on  the  theme  of  the  redemptive  \irtue  of 
Christ's  death.  The  notion  that  the  Messiah  should  go 
the  way  of  suffering  and  death  was  decidedly  foreign  to 
their  minds.  The  gospel  narratives  show  that  they  were 
stumbled  by  this  thought,  and  had  not  become  reconciled 
to  it  up  to  the  consummation  of  the  tragedy  on  Calvary. 
To  minds  thus  inappreciative  and  resisting  the  accom- 
plished fact  of  the  death  of  their  Lord  and  Master  must 
be  present  before  they  could  be  in  the  proper  mood  to 
explore  its  meaning.     It  accords  therefore  with  the  his- 

1  Matt,  xxviii.  19.         2  Matt.  xii.  31  ;  Mark  iii.  29;  Luke  xii,  10, 


I06  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

torical  conditions  that  on  this  theme  only  a  few  sentences 
fell  from  the  lips  of  Christ.  That  these  assign  a  high 
importance  to  the  freely  accepted  death  is  indisputable. 
Sentences  like  these,  "  The  Son  of  Man  came  to  give 
His  life  a  ransom  for  many/'^  "This  is  my  blood  of 
the  covenant  shed  for  many  unto  remission  of  sins,"^ 
leave  no  room  to  doubt  that  in  the  thought  of  Christ  His 
death  was  a  crowning  factor  in  the  establishment  of  the 
gracious  economy  which  He  represented.  The  precise 
ground  or  reason  of  the  efficacy  attached  to  His  death 
is  not  stated ;  neither  is  it  suggested  with  any  such  degree 
of  definiteness  as  to  give  a  basis  for  a  clear-cut  exclusive 
theory.  The  advocate  of  the  moral  influence  theory  can 
find  support  for  his  contention  in  the  fact  that  in  one  of 
the  connections  in  which  Christ  forecast  His  sufferings 
and  death  He  went  on  to  speak  of  the  necessity  and  the 
fruitfulness  of  self-denial  in  His  disciples  generally.^ 
This  order  of  association,  it  may  be  urged,  suggests  that 
Christ's  death  is  to  be  reckoned  as  simply  the  supreme 
specimen  of  the  power  of  self-sacrifice  to  further  the 
interests  of  righteousness.  On  the  other  hand,  the  one 
who  prefers  to  find  an  element  of  vicarious  satisfaction 
in  the  death  of  Christ  can  point  to  the  fact  that  in  the 

1  Matt.  XX.  28 ;  Mark  x.  45. 

2  Matt.  xxvi.  28  ;  Mark  xiv.  24 ;  Luke  xxii.  20.  The  fact  that  only 
in  Matthew's  report  of  the  words  of  Christ  is  the  shedding  of  the  blood 
expressly  associated  with  the  remission  of  sins,  is  very  inadequate 
ground  for  denying  that  such  association  was  intended.  All  three 
Gospels  designate  the  blood  as  the  blood  of  a  covenant  shed  for  others. 
This  is  sacrificial  language,  and  under  the  given  conditions  is  most 
naturally  construed  as  pointing  to  a  ground  or  means  of  remission. 

8  Matt.  xvi.  21-25  ;  Mark  viii.  31-35  ;  Luke  ix.  22-24. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING 


107 


sentence  on  giving  His  life  as  a  ransom  for  many  the 
preposition  used  is  avrl,  the  very  word  which  would 
have  been  employed  if  the  design  was  to  express  the 
notion  of  substitution.  To  neither  theory,  however,  do 
the  words  of  Christ,  taken  by  themselves,  give  any  dis- 
tinct and  exclusive  right  of  way.  To  reach  a  definite 
outcome  on  this  subject  it  is  necessary  to  go  beyond 
the  Synoptical  representation  and  to  take  the  unfolding 
apostolic  consciousness  as  presumably  reaching  the  essen- 
tial points  in  the  meaning  of  the  death  upon  the  cross. 

IX.  —  Christ's  Teaching  on  the  Progress  and 
Consummation  of  the  Kingdom. 

Notice  was  taken  in  a  preceding  section  of  the  fact 
that  many  sayings  of  Christ  picture  the  kingdom  as 
destined  to  a  gradual  unfoldment  in  the  world.  It  was 
observed  also  that  in  some  of  these  sayings  the  kingdom 
was  viewed  preeminently  as  an  interior  personal  treasure. 
It  remains  to  be  noted  here  that  Christ's  conception 
of  divine  fatherhood  and  human  brotherhood  logically 
implied  a  very  decided  stress  upon  the  social  character 
of  the  kingdom.  In  appropriating  the  word  i/c/cXrjaia, 
or  Church,  He  made  use  of  a  term  which  gives  expres- 
sion to  this  social  character.  The  Church  is  the  king- 
dom viewed  particularly  in  respect  of  the  interrelation 
of  its  subjects.  It  is  the  society  formed  under  the  new 
covenant.  The  name  Church  conveys  somewhat  more 
of  an  impression  of  organization,  definiteness,  and  visi- 
bility than  does  the  companion  term  as  employed  in  the 
Gospels.     Only  in  its  ideal  character,  or  in  so  far  as  it 


I08  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Stands  for  the  actualized  reign  of  God  in  the  world,  is 
the  Church  identical  with  the  kingdom.  The  human 
and  accidental  elements  which  are  inevitably  connected 
with  any  organization  upon  earth,  and  which  began  to 
modify  the  Christian  Church  from  the  start,  differenced 
it  in  a  measure  from  the  ideal  which  Christ  expressed  by 
the  phrase  kingdom  of  God  or  kingdom  of  heaven. 

It  is  somewhat  remarkable  that  only  in  the  first  of 
the  Synoptical  Gospels  does  the  word  Church  occur. 
Matthew  introduces  it  in  two  instances.^  In  the  view  of 
some  critics  this  exclusive  mention  is  a  ground  of  sus- 
picion, and  they  are  inclined  to  argue  that  it  is  a  sign  of 
a  catholicizing  tendency,  or  a  leaning  to  a  pronounced 
ecclesiasticism,  lying  back  of  the  composition  of  this 
particular  Gospel.  But  this  conclusion  is  not  likely  to 
win  very  wide  acceptance.  In  the  first  place,  Christ  was 
debarred  from  speaking  of  a  distinct  society,  apart  from 
the  Jewish  communion,  until  it  became  appropriate  to 
announce  His  certain  rejection  by  organized  Judaism ; 
discourse  respecting  the  Church  that  was  to  be  founded 
upon  His  person  and  message  was  naturally  deferred  to 
the  closing  part  of  His  ministry  and  rarely  had  place. 
Again  the  contents  of  the  first  Gospel  do  not  agree  with 
the  supposition  that  its  references  to  the  Church  were 
due  outright  to  a  catholicizing  tendency.  Whatever  of 
churchly  import  one  influenced  by  later  ecclesiastical 
associations  may  attach  to  some  of  its  sentences,  it 
certainly  contains  statements  which  breathe  the  very 
opposite  of  a  spirit  of  high  ecclesiasticism.  Once  more, 
in  dialect  or  verbal  peculiarity  Matthew's  references  to 

iMatt.  xvi.  i8;  xviii.  17. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  109 

the  Church  are  such  that  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that 
they  were  the  offspring  of  a  doctrinaire  temper  in  the 
compiler.  They  sound  rather  like  the  unstudied  products 
of  the  energetic  spirit  of  Christ.  Why  Matthew  alone 
should  have  recorded  them  is  doubtless  somewhat  of  a 
puzzle.  But  no  one  of  the  evangelists  undertook  to 
record  everything,  and  in  general  it  is  impossible  to 
explain  every  instance  of  selection  or  rejection  on  the 
part  of  a  compiler.  Matthew's  record  may  indicate  a 
superior  interest  in  church  organization ;  that  he  went 
outside  of  the  facts  is  by  no  means  proved. 

While  Christ  forecast  the  existence  of  the  Church, 
there  is  no  evidence  that  He  devised  for  it  a  specific 
constitution  or  scheme  of  polity.  To  take  the  words 
wherewith  Christ  responded  to  the  confession  of  Peter  in 
the  sense  of  an  ecclesiastical  constitution  does  violence 
to  the  connection  and  to  the  whole  spirit  of  Christ's 
message.  The  words  square  with  the  confession.  In 
the  unwavering  intelligent  confession  of  his  Master  as 
the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  Peter  stood  forth 
as  the  first  Christian.  Accordingly  Christ  appropriately 
contemplated  him  on  the  spot  as  the  beginning  of  the 
foundation  of  His  church,  the  first  stone  or  rock  upon 
which  He  might  build  the  spiritual  edifice  that  it  was 
His  vocation  to  establish  in  the  world.  It  was  the 
spiritual  character  of  Peter  revealed  in  the  confession 
which  suggested  his  serviceableness  as  a  foundation. 
As  this  character  was  plainly  not  a  matter  for  a  legal 
transfer,  so  no  hint  was  given  of  a  transfer  of  Peter's 
place  in  the  foundation  to  a  line  of  official  successors. 
The  rational  inference  to  be  drawn  was  rather  that  those. 


no  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

and  those  only,  who  might  be  assimilated  to  the  character  ^ 
of  Peter  as  true  confessors  of  Christ  would  be  fitted  to 
share  the  honor  of  a  place  in  the  foundation  of  the 
Church.  To  divorce  the  honorary  words  addressed  to 
the  apostle  from  their  close  association  with  a  definite 
spiritual  character  in  him,  and  to  turn  them  into  a 
charter  for  a  perpetual  official  Roman  primacy,  is  to 
indulge  in  such  violence  and  wooden  insipidity  of  exe- 
gesis that  it  is  almost  a  wonder  that  even  an  intemperate 
hierarchical  ambition  could  have  reconciled  itself  to  this 
shift. 

The  foregoing  exposition  of  Peter's  place  in  the  founda- 
tion is  very  decidedly  sustained  by  a  consideration  of  the 
total  message  of  Christ  on  the  subject  of  binding  and 
loosing.  The  prerogative  which  is  associated  with  Peter 
in  this  matter  is  extended  in  a  later  reference  to  the 
disciples  generally.  In  Matt,  xviii.  18-20  we  read, 
*' Verily  I  say  unto  you.  What  things  soever  ye  shall 
bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven  ;  and  what  things 
soever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven. 
Again  I  say  unto  you,  that  if  two  of  you  shall  agree  on 
earth  as  touching  anything  that  they  shall  ask,  it  shall 
be  done  for  them  of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven.  For 
where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name, 
there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them."  The  passage  taken 
in  its  entirety,  as  it  promises  the  helpful  presence  of 
Christ  to  any  company  of  faithful  disciples,  favors  mani- 
festly the  possible  execution  by  any  such  company  of  the 
office  of  binding  and  loosing.  The  foregoing  context 
too  is  entirely  favorable  to  this  interpretation,  as  it 
points  to  duties  universally  incumbent  on  Christians  and 


THE    SYNOPTICAL   TEACHING  iii 

not  merely  on  ecclesiastical  rulers.  Peter  then  in  the 
matter  of  binding  and  loosing  appears  only  as  the  first 
Christian,  the  typical  disciple.  No  sort  of  exclusive 
lordship  is  assigned  to  him  here.  By  parity  of  reasoning 
we  may  conclude  that  in  the  matter  of  serving  as  the 
foundation  he  figured  simply  as  the  first  Christian,  the 
typical  disciple,  and  that  it  was  not  in  the  thought  of 
Christ  to  affirm  for  him  any  exclusive  function.  How 
far  the  mind  of  Christ  was  from  the  notion  of  concen- 
trated ecclesiastical  authority  is  intimated  by  these  words : 
"Ye  know  that  the  rulers  of  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over 
them,  and  their  great  ones  exercise  authority  over  them. 
Not  so  shall  it  be  among  you :  but  whosoever  would 
become  great  among  you  shall  be  your  minister;  and 
whosoever  would  be  first  among  you  shall  be  your 
servant."  ^ 

It  is  quite  evident  that  in  the  strong  language  about 
binding  and  loosing  addressed  to  Peter,  and  then  to 
Christian  disciples  generally,  Christ  contemplated  the 
Church  in  its  ideal  character.  Only  an  ideal  Church,  or 
one  thoroughly  dominated  by  the  spirit  of  Christ,  has  a 
guaranty  that  its  binding  and  loosing  on  earth  will  agree 
with  the  binding  and  loosing  in  heaven.  In  so  far  as 
the  Church  gives  place  to  an  unchristian  temper,  and 
departs  from  the  path  of  spiritual  illumination,  it  must  be 
seriously  exposed  to  faulty  procedure  in  binding  and 
loosing.  The  notion  of  an  infallibility  which  is  capable 
of  divorce  from  holy  character  belongs  to  a  magical  and 
pagan  scheme,  and  is  utterly  contrary  to  the  ethical 
standpoint  of  Christ.     As  respects  the  meaning  of  the 

^Matt.  XX.  25,  26. 


112  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

power  to  bind  and  loose,  it  may  be  taken  either  in  a 
legislative  or  a  disciplinary  sense.  In  the  former  sense 
it  denotes  a  prerogative  of  prohibition  and  permission  in 
matters  of  conduct,  a  faculty  of  judging  as  to  what  is 
compatible  with  the  Christian  standing.  In  the  latter 
sense  it  signifies  a  faculty  to  put  on  and  to  take  off 
censures.  -  Either  of  the  two  senses  naturally  implies 
the  other,  since  rules  of  conduct  are  made  to  be  admin- 
istered, and  administration  rests  back  upon  rules  or 
maxims.  The  words  of  Christ  in  this  relation,  therefore, 
contemplated  a  spiritual  brotherhood  in  which  the  collect- 
ive moral  sense,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
should  sustain  an  essentially  correct  standard  of  conduct 
and  effect  a  corresponding  administration  of  discipline. 

The  special  training  which  Christ  gave  a  special  group 
of  His  disciples  implies  that  He  designed  for  this  group 
a  sort  of  leadership.  As  originally  instituted,  however, 
the  apostolic  office  was  rather  in  the  prophetical  line 
than  in  that  of  the  ecclesiastical  magistrate.  The 
apostles  were  first  of  all  preeminent  witnesses  and 
teachers  as  having  had  the  advantage  of  a  preeminent 
tuition.  Doubtless  their  leadership  in  these  respects 
caused  their  judgment  to  be  deferred  to,  and  tended  as 
the  years  passed  to  clothe  them  with  a  very  considerable, 
though  not  strictly  defined,  jurisdiction.  But  this  came 
about  by  a  natural  evolution  and  the  unforced  consent 
of  the  Christian  body.  There  is  not  a  line  of  evidence 
for  the  notion  that  Christ  made  out  for  the  apostles  any 
precise  scheme  of  administrative  prerogatives.  He  sent 
them  forth  as  missionaries  and  prophets  of  the  new  dis- 
pensation, to  win  such  authority  as  the  faithful  fulfill- 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  113 

ment  of  their  missionary  and  prophetical  vocation  might 
bring  to  them. 

It  accords  with  the  profoundly  ethical  character  of 
Christ's  teaching  that  very  little  prominence  was  given 
therein  to  rites  and  ceremonies.  All  that  the  Synoptical 
Gospels  contain  in  this  line  is  a  few  sentences  relative 
to  baptism  and  the  eucharist.  Respecting  the  former 
indeed  positive  injunction  is  limited  to  one  sentence 
recorded  by  a  single  evangelist.^  This  one  sentence 
too  has  not  lacked  a  challenge  from  the  side  of  criti- 
cism. It  is  alleged  that  the  sentence  in  which  Matthew 
publishes  the  command  to  baptize,  with  its  trinitarian 
phraseology,  is  not  after  the  style  of  speaking  char- 
acteristic of  Christ,  and  furthermore  that  it  disagrees 
with  the  implication  of  the  New  Testament  that  baptism 
was  primarily  in  the  name  of  Christ  simply.  In  reply, 
it  may  be  said  on  the  first  point  that  the  doctrine  of 
Christ  was  eminently  the  doctrine  of  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit,  and  that,  while  ordinarily  He  did  not  take  pains 
to  collocate  these  names,  there  is  nothing  incredible  in 
the  supposition  that  He  may  have  done  so  in  issuing 
a  final  commission  to  His  disciples.  As  regards  the 
second  point,  a  twofold  consideration  is  properly  brought 
forward.  On  the  one  hand  the  assumption  that  the  so- 
called  formulary  in  Matthew,  supposing  it  to  have  been 
extant  in  the  apostolic  era,  would  necessarily  have  been 
taken  as  a  formulary  proper,  may  be  questioned.  A 
parallel  instance  legitimates  a  doubt  on  this  particular. 
The  New  Testament  gives  no  indication  of  the  use  of 
the  Lord's  prayer  as  a  liturgical  form.     But,  as  has  been 

1  Matt,  xxviii.  19. 


114  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

aptly  urged,  "  this  does  not  prove  that  the  Lord's  prayer 
was  not  spoken  by  Jesus.  It  only  proves  that  the  age 
of  the  apostles  was  an  age  of  freedom  from  forms. 
When,  however,  we  come  to  the  Didache  (viii.  2,  3),  we 
find  Christians  enjoined  to  repeat  the  Lord's  prayer 
three  times  a  day."  ^  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  room 
to  question  whether  in  the  references  to  baptism  in  Acts 
and  the  epistles  there  was  a  design  to  give  the  precise 
formula  that  was  used  or  counted  obligatory.  The  stress 
was  undoubtedly  upon  the  confession  of  Christ  in  bap- 
tism. In  connection  with  the  first  converts  it  was  a 
matter  of  course  that  they  confessed  faith  in  the  Father 
and  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  specifically  new  element 
of  belief  which  they  were  called  upon  solemnly  to  pro- 
fess was  faith  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  God,  sent  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world.  Natu- 
rally, therefore,  emphasis  was  put  upon  the  fact  of  their 
being  baptized  into  Christ  or  in  the  name  of  Christ. 
That  this  expression  could  be  used  in  a  non-liturgical 
sense  at  the  very  time  when  the  liturgy  prescribed  bap- 
tism in  the  threefold  name  is  illustrated  in  the  Didache. 
While  this  writing  describes  the  initial  Christian  rite  as 
**  baptism  into  the  name  of  the  Lord  "  (ix.  5),  in  its  Htur- 
gical  instruction  it  enjoins  that  the  rite  shall  be  per- 
formed in  **  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost "  (vii.  i).  Very  likely  for  a  consider- 
able interval  there  was  no  distinct  sense  of  obligation  to 
follow  a  stereotyped  phrase.  We  conclude,  then,  that 
an  overplus  of  dogmatism  enters  into  the  assertion  that 
Christ  could  not  possibly  have  spoken  the  words  which 

1  Lambert,  The  Sacraments  of  the  New  Testament,  pp.  50-52. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  115 

Matthew  records  relative  to  baptism.^  At  the  same 
time,  there  is  little  motive  to  insist  that  Matthew  repeats 
here  the  precise  words  of  the  Master.  It  serves  every 
practical  end  to  suppose  that  they  express  essentially 
His  intention.  That  Christ  purposed  and  sanctioned 
such  a  rite  as  baptism  is  made  probable  by  the  fact  that 
its  administration  seems  to  have  been  treated  as  a  mat- 
ter of  course  from  the  first  days  of  Christianity, 

As  in  connection  with  baptism,  so  also  in  relation  to 
the  eucharistic  celebration,  little  in  the  way  of  formal 
injunction  can  be  cited  from  the  lips  of  Christ.  The 
Gospels  represent  the  Master  as  taking  the  eucharistic 
elements,  delivering  them  to  the  disciples,  and  express- 
ing their  significance.^  No  plain  command  is  recorded 
for  a  repetition  of  the  symbolic  acts  on  future  occasions, 
unless  it  be  in  the  words  of  Luke,  "  This  do  in  remem- 
brance of  me  " ;  and  it  is  possible  to  regard  these  words 
as  an  unauthorized  addition  to  a  more  authentic  text  in 
Matthew  or  Mark.  A  suspicion  that  this  is  the  case 
finds  harborage  in  the  fact  that  manuscript  authority  on 
the  text  of  Luke  is  divided.^      But  while  the   special 

1  Against  such  an  assertion  the  following  words  of  a  very  competent 
investigator,  relative  to  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  may  appropriately  be  cited: 
"  I  have  no  trouble  in  referring  back  this  form  of  baptism  to  the  Lord 
Himself,  and  think  that  Matthew's  Gospel  derived  the  formulary  from 
the  practice  of  the  church  at  Jerusalem."  (Kattenbusch,  Zeitschrift  fiir 
Theologie  und  Kirche,  5te  Heft,  1901.) 

2  Matt.  xxvi.  26-29;  ^ark  xiv.  22-25  5  Luke  xxii.  15-20. 

8  See  Sanday,  Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  II.  636 ;  Lambert, 
The  Sacraments  of  the  New  Testament,  pp.  245,  246.  The  former  fol- 
lows Westcott  and  Hort  in  excluding  the  phrase  in  question.  The 
latter  notices  that  recent  criticism  tends  very  largely  to  retain  the  phrase. 
On  this  side  are  mentioned  Jiilicher,  Schmiedel,  Cramer,  Schultzen, 
Schaefer,  Clemen,  Schweitzer,  Bering,  and  Menzies. 


Il6  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Statement  in  the  third  Gospel  may  not  be  an  unequivocal 
ground  of  belief  in  our  Lord's  intention  to  found  a  per- 
manent rite,  a  basis  for  such  a  belief  is  not  wanting. 
The  association  which  the  several  Gospels  make  between 
the  transactions  of  the  last  supper  and  a  covenant  con- 
veys the  impression  that  these  transactions  were  meant 
to  have  an  institutional  character,  since  a  covenant  in 
Christ's  blood  is  a  matter  which  concerns  the  disciples 
of  Christ  to  the  end  of  time,  and  is  intrinsically  suitable 
for  a  recurring  celebration.  Very  decidedly  reinforcing 
this  impression  are  the  traces  of  a  dominant  conviction 
in  the  early  Christian  body.  Paul  writing  within  about 
twenty-five  years  of  the  death  of  Christ,  expressed  the 
most  undoubting  conviction  that  He  estabhshed  the 
eucharist  as  a  memorial  rite  to  be  repeated  in  His  Church 
till  His  coming.^  Now  Paul  was  not  so  much  of  a 
ritualist  that  he  should  have  had  the  slightest  disposition 
to  invent  a  rite  on  his  own  account.  In  the  essentials 
of  his  interpretation  he  undoubtedly  expressed  the  con- 
sensus of  apostolic  conviction.  We  hold  then  that  the 
historic  evidence  favors  the  institution  of  baptism  and  the 
eucharist  by  Christ,  that  is,  His  institution  or  commen- 
dation of  the  emblematic    rites  bearing   those  names. 

1  The  words  of  Paul,  "  I  received  of  the  Lord  that  which  also  I 
delivered  unto  you  "  (i  Cor.  xi.  23),  must  be  understood  to  mean  that  his 
instructions  to  the  Corinthians  had  been  based  on  trustworthy  reports 
as  to  what  transpired  at  the  last  supper,  these  reports  being  the  medium 
through  which  the  will  of  the  Lord  had  been  transmitted  to  himself. 
The  supposition  that  the  apostle  meant  to  claim  that  he  received  through 
direct  revelation  from  heaven,  at  a  time  when  living  witnesses  of  the 
facts  were  at  hand,  a  detailed  knowledge  of  Christ's  procedure  at  the 
supper  which  preceded  His  crucifixion,  is  simply  incredible. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING 


117 


Of  baptism  and  the  eucharist  viewed  as  parts  of  a  scheme 
of  ecclesiastical  magic  there  is  no  proper  suggestion  in 
the  Synoptical  Gospels. 

In  the  gospel  picture  no  wide  interval  is  interposed 
between  the  beginning  and  the  end  of  the  dispensation. 
It  is  more  natural  for  a  fervent  religious  idealism  to 
glance  toward  the  final  outcome  than  to  give  prolonged 
attention  to  intermediate  stages.  In  the  case  of  Christ 
there  was,  moreover,  a  special  occasion  to  paint  the 
scene  of  glory  lying  at  the  end.  He  was  obliged  to 
admit  deep  shadows  into  the  foreground,  to  outline  a 
painful  and  enigmatic  scene  of  suffering,  shame,  and 
death.  In  face  of  these  things  it  was  necessary  to 
hearten  the  disciples  with  a  glimpse  of  the  triumph  lying 
beyond  the  shame  and  the  seeming  defeat.  Therefore 
Christ  passed  rapidly  over  the  nearer  events  in  the  prog- 
ress of  the  Church  or  kingdom  and  cheered  the  disciples 
with  a  vision  of  the  grand  consummation. 

As  Christ  felt  authorized  to  assume  a  most  intimate 
connection  between  the  kingdom  and  His  own  person, 
He  could  consistently  identify  a  triumph  of  the  kingdom 
with  His  own  triumph,  and  in  pictorial  language  describe 
it  as  a  coming  of  the  Son  of  man,  that  is,  a  manifestation 
of  the  victorious  life  and  activity  of  the  Christ  whom 
Jewish  hatred  sought  to  bind  with  the  fetters  of  death 
and  the  grave.  A  spiritual  outburst  like  that  of  Pente- 
cost, or  a  great  judgment  like  that  which  sealed  the  fate 
of  Jerusalem,  as  it  marked  a  signal  era  in  the  progress  of 
the  kingdom,  showed  forth  Christ  as  the  living  head 
of  the  kingdom,  and  could  be  accounted  in  a  manner 


Il8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

His  coming  or  self -manifestation.  Some  sentences  in 
the  Synoptical  Gospels  are  perhaps  construed  with  least 
difficulty  when  the  reference  to  Christ's  coming  is  taken 
in  this  sense. 1  But  there  are  other  sentences,  such  as 
some  of  those  in  the  eschatological  discourse  reported  in 
Matt,  xxiv  and  Mark  xiii,  which  certainly  seem  to  refer 
to  a  coming  that  is  coincident  with  the  closing  up  of  the 
dispensation,  a  great  final  coming  which  is  to  supplement 
the  office  of  every  preceding  visitation  and  bring  the 
triumph  of  the  kingdom  to  a  perfect  fulfillment. 

With  respect  to  the  time  of  His  coming  Christ  de- 
clined to  make  a  statement.  He  declared  indeed  that 
it  was  unknown  to  men,  angels,  and  even  to  the  Son.^ 
Some  exegetes,  it  is  true,  have  concluded  on  the  basis 
of  the  connected  statement,  "  This  generation  shall  not 
pass  away  till  all  these  things  be  accomplished,"  ^  that 
Christ  expected  the  end  of  the  dispensation  to  fall  with- 
in the  generation  then  living.  But  this  involves  irrecon- 
cilable disagreements.  How  could  Christ  confidently 
affirm  that  the  end  was  so  near  and  then  solemnly  dis- 
claim knowledge  of  the  day  and  hour  ?  It  has  been  said 
indeed  that  He  thought  of  the  great  consummation  as 
close  at  hand,  certain  to  overtake  that  generation,  but 
wished  to  declare  Himself  uninformed  of  the  precise  day 
and  hour.  Such  an  explanation,  however,  supposes  a 
technicality  which  is  to  be  declared  alien  to  the  speech 
of  Christ.     To  locate  a  supreme  crisis  within  the  limits 

iMatt.  xvi.  28;  Mark  ix.  i  ;  Luke  ix,  27.  On  the  probable  displace- 
ment of  Matt.  X.  23  see  Stevens,  Theology  of  the  New  Testament, 
p.  150. 

2  Matt.  xxiv.  36;  Mark  xiii.  32.         8]V[att.  xxiv.  34;  Mark  xiii.  30. 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING 


119 


of  a  specific  generation  was  coming  to  such  close  quar- 
ters that  it  is  immensely  improbable  that  after  doing  this 
Christ  would  have  felt  called  upon  solemnly  to  asserv- 
erate  that  the  day  and  hour  of  that  crisis  were  unknown 
to  all  beings  in  the  universe  except  the  Father.  More- 
over it  contradicts  foregoing  statements  of  Christ  to 
suppose  that  He  looked  for  the  end  in  that  generation. 
For  example,  shortly  before  He  uttered  the  eschatologi- 
cal  discourse,  He  had  intimated  in  the  parable  of  the 
marriage  of  the  king's  son  ^  that  judgment  should  befall 
the  Jews  in  the  destruction  of  their  city,  and  that  the 
outside  peoples  should  be  brought  in  to  take  their  place 
in  the  kingdom.  A  representation  like  this  naturally 
implies  a  very  considerable  interval  between  the  over- 
throw of  Jerusalem  and  the  closing  up  of  the  dispensa- 
tion. To  conceive  that  Christ  thought  that  the  untu- 
tored Gentile  nations  could  be  instructed  and  brought  to 
the  status  of  intelligent  and  faithful  subjects  of  the  king- 
dom in  a  few  months  or  years  is  to  conceive  of  a  thing 
that  is  contradictory  both  to  the  extraordinary  insight  of 
Christ  and  to  His  explicit  teaching  on  the  method  of  the 
unfoldment  of  the  kingdom.  Our  conclusion  then  is 
that  the  evangelists  in  compiling  the  sayings  of  Christ 
respecting  the  end,  either  by  omission  or  imperfect 
arrangement,  have  obscured  the  original  connection  of 
some  of  His  words.^  It  involves  too  much  of  self-con- 
tradiction on  the  part  of  Christ  to  grant  that  He  fixed 

^  Matt.  xxii.  i-io. 

2  Compare  the  verdict  of  Moff  att :  "As  they  stand  the  Synoptic 
apocalpyses  cannot  be  brought  within  the  limits  of  a  single  personality 
or  situation  without  self-contradiction  "(^The  Historical   New   Testa- 


120  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  end  of  the  dispensation  within  the  Umits  of  that  gen- 
eration. 

It  may  have  been  observed  that  in  the  above  discus- 
sion we  have  declined  a  means  of  escaping  difficulty 
which  has  commended  itself  to  a  number  of  commenta- 
tors, namely  the  assumption  that  the  discourse  in  Matt. 
xxiv  and  Mark  xiii  does  not  look  beyond  the  catastrophe 
of  Jerusalem's  downfall.  It  belonged,  they  contend,  to 
the  graphic  prophetical  style  to  portray  any  great  histori- 
cal crisis  by  figures  indicative  of  a  general  convulsion. 
It  is  not  necessary  therefore  to  suppose  that  the  strong 
imagery  employed  was  meant  to  picture  the  end  of  the 
world.  The  foresight  of  the  overthrow  of  the  holy  city 
and  the  nation  was  a  sufficient  warrant,  before  the  pro- 
phetical standard,  for  the  language  used.  Now,  in  re- 
sponse to  this  plea,  we  grant  that  prophetical  language 
is  not  to  be  measured  by  the  rules  of  sober  prose. 
Nevertheless  we  are  not  able  to  persuade  ourselves  that 
the  evangelists  who  recorded  such  words  as  are  contained 
in  Matt.  xxiv.  29-31  and  Mark  xiii.  24-27  believed  that 
anything  less  was  pictured  therein  than  the  supreme 
crisis,  the  end  of  the  dispensation.  The  coming  de- 
scribed in  this  connection  has  every  appearance  of  iden- 
tity with  that  which  in  Matt.  xxv.  3 1  is  made  the  im- 
mediate antecedent  of  universal  judgment. 

It  should  be  noticed  that  in  the  Synoptical  representa- 
tion the  final  coming  of  Christ  is  treated  as  if  identical 

ment,  p.  641);  also  the  conclusion  of  Haupt,  that  the  eschatological 
discourses  in  question  are  a  mosaic,  composed  of  many  pieces,  some  of 
which  in  the  process  of  combination  have  not  gained  an  appropriate 
setting  (Die  eschatologischen  Aussagen  Jesu,  pp.  21-45). 


THE  SYNOPTICAL  TEACHING  121 

with  His  glorious  manifestation.  No  definite  local  asso- 
ciation is  given  to  it.  Nothing  is  said  about  installation 
upon  an  earthly  theatre.  The  coming  is  placed  in  imme- 
diate conjunction  with  the  act  of  judging  men  and  por- 
tioning out  eternal  rewards. 

Concerning  the  resurrection  which  New  Testament 
thought  closely  associated  with  the  final  coming  of  Christ 
the  Synoptical  Gospels  offer  no  very  definite  specifica- 
tions. In  responding  to  the  Sadducees  Christ  spoke  of 
the  dead  as  being  raised,  and  He  must  have  understood 
that  His  language  would  naturally  be  taken  by  the  peo- 
ple in  the  sense  of  a  bodily  resurrection  .^  At  the  same 
time,  it  may  be  noticed  that  the  argument  which  He 
adduces  makes  rather  for  the  general  truth  of  a  vital  im- 
mortality than  for  the  fact  of  a  reinvestment  of  the  dead 
with  bodies.  It  is  to  be  observed  also  that  His  language 
is  somewhat  antagonistic  to  the  idea  of  a  literal  reproduc- 
tion of  the  present  body,  since  He  likens  the  subjects  of 
the  resurrection  to  the  angels  in  heaven.  Whether  the 
wicked  are  included  in  the  resurrection  is  not  definitely 
indicated.  Some  find  in  the  statement  that  participants 
in  the  resurrection  are  to  be  as  the  angels  in  heaven  a 
token  of  the  exclusion  of  the  wicked.  But  the  inference 
has  a  very  slender  basis,  since  in  the  given  connection 
the  main  intent  of  Christ  was  not  to  define  who  shall 
share  in  the  resurrection,  but  to  bring  out  the  fact  that 
family  institutions  are  foreign  to  the  resurrection  state. 
Two  phrases  of  Luke's  Gospel  may  be  cited  with  some 
plausibihty  for  the  limitation  of  the  resurrection  to  the 
righteous,  mention  being  made  of  the  "  resurrection  of 

1  Matt.  xxii.  23-32  ;  Mark  xii.  18-27. 


122  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  just,"  ^  and  the  "  sons  of  the  resurrection  "  being 
characterized  as  "  sons  of  God."  ^  On  the  other  hand, 
Luke  represents  Christ  as  saying  that  all  live  unto  God.^ 
Moreover,  it  may  be  noticed  that  the  language  of  Christ, 
as  reported  by  the  Synoptists  generally,  assumes  that  all 
men  are  subjects  of  the  final  judgment,  and  that  it  is  in 
line  with  New  Testament  thought  to  reckon  those  called 
to  judgment  as  subjects  of  the  resurrection.* 

The  language  associated  with  the  theme  of  the  gene- 
ral judgment  implies  that  the  awards  rendered  therein 
were  meant  to  be  understood  as  expressing  final  destiny.^ 
The  word  al(ovLo<;,  it  is  true,  does  not  necessarily  sig- 
nify endless  duration  ;  but  that  is  the  only  natural  sense 
to  give  it  in  a  passage  which  has  so  distinct  an  air  of 
finality  as  belongs  to  the  sentences  descriptive  of  the 
great  day  of  judgment.  As  respects  the  infliction  of 
fire  which  is  foreshadowed,  it  needs  only  to  be  remem- 
bered that  it  belonged  to  the  prophetical  dialect  to  sym- 
bolize retribution  by  the  element  of  fire.  There  is  no 
more  occasion  to  take  the  word  in  a  literal  sense  than 
there  is  to  so  construe  the  outer  darkness  which  also 
was  used  as  an  emblem  of  punishment.^ 

1  Luke  xiv.  14.  2  Luke  xx.  ^6.  ^  Luke  xx.  38. 

*  John  V.  28,  29;  Rev.  xx.  12,  13;  Acts  xxiv.  15. 
6  Matt.  XXV.  46 ;  Mark  ix.  43-48. 

•  Matt  viii.  12,  xxv.  30. 


CHAPTER  III 

PORTIONS  OF  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  MORE  OR 
LESS  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL  GOSPELS  IN 
THEIR  REPRESENTATION  OF  A  PRIMITIVE  TYPE 
OF  CHRISTIAN  TEACHING 

I.  —  Consideration  of  the  Proper  Compass  of  the 
Chapter. 

The  qualifying  clause,  *'  more  or  less,"  which  is  put 
into  the  title  of  the  chapter,  is  by  no  means  superfluous. 
No  subsequent  portion  of  the  New  Testament  reflects 
precisely  the  content  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels.  Either 
a  falling  short  of  the  level  of  the  Synoptical  teaching  is 
noticeable,  or  else  there  is  a  perceptible  advance,  in 
respect  of  theological  construction,  beyond  the  letter  of 
that  teaching.  Still  it  is  not  wholly  arbitrary  to  assign 
to  certain  books  somewhat  of  a  special  association  with 
the  type  of  the  first  three  Gospels.  They  do  not  show, 
at  least  in  a  conspicuous  degree,  the  effect  of  the  great 
currents  which  came  in  during  the  apostolic  age  to  color 
New  Testament  speech  and  thought,  whether  in  the 
masterful  influence  of  Paul,  or  the  idealistic  speculation 
of  Alexandria.  They  have,  moreover,  this  direct  bond 
of  association  with  the  Synoptical  Gospels,  that  they 
reflect  very  largely  a  Jewish  environment.  However 
much  they  may  differ  from  one  another,  they  reveal  in 
common  an  intimate  connection  with  Judaism. 


124  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

I.  Under  this  description  belongs  in  the  first  place  the 
earlier  part  of  the  Book  of  Acts  (chaps,  i-xv).  In  re- 
spect of  time  of  composition,  it  is  true,  no  claim  to  a 
specially  primitive  character  can  be  asserted  for  this 
book.  While  there  is  no  adequate  reason  for  question- 
ing the  unanimous  verdict  of  the  early  Church  that  the 
Luke  whose  name  is  connected  with  the  third  Gospel 
was  its  author,!  j^  cannot  be  proved  that  he  wrote  it 
before  the  closing  decades  of  the  first  century.  It  has 
been  argued  that  the  writer  of  the  history  must  have 
laid  down  his  pen  by  the  year  64,  otherwise  he  would 
have  recounted  events  of  such  marked  interest  as  the 
Neronian  persecution  and  the  martyrdom  of  the  great 
heroes  of  his  story.  But  this  is  a  precarious  ground  for 
a  positive  conclusion.  A  politic  regard  for  the  interest 
of  a  party  that  had  no  certain  standing-room  in  the 
empire  may  have  led  to  silence  on  a  Roman  persecution ; 
or  the  author  may  have  been  interrupted  in  his  task 
and  had  no  opportunity  to  complete  it ;  or  it  may  have 
answered  the  purpose  of  his  treatise,  as  being  very  largely 

1  The  principal  considerations  which  may  be  urged  for  the  Lucan 
authorship  have  been  rendered  as  follows  :  "  It  is  the  one  assumption 
which  gives  a  natural  and  adequate  explanation  (i)  of  the  fact  that  at 
the  end  of  the  second  century  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  third,  St. 
Luke  was  accounted  its  author  by  writers  representing  the  chief  churches 
of  Christendom;  (2)  of  internal  characteristics  of  the  Book,  the  traces 
of  medical  phraseology  in  the  language  and  the  abrupt  transition  from 
the  third  person  of  the  historian  to  the  first  person  of  the  eye-witness. 
Further  (3)  it  enables  us  to  give  a  reasonable  account  of  the  sources 
whence  the  writer  derived  his  knowledge  of  the  events,  widely  separated 
in  time  and  place,  which  he  records."  (Chase,  The  Credibility  of  the 
Book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  p.  28.  See  also  Hawkins,  Horae 
Synopticae,  pp.  148-154. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       125 

a  missionary  sketch,  to  have  traced  the  progress  of 
Christianity  from  Jerusalem  to  its  establishment  under 
apostolic  oversight  in  the  imperial  capital.  It  is  thus 
quite  gratuitous  to  identify  the  point  at  which  the  history 
closes  with  the  time  of  composition.  Two  or  three 
decades  may  have  intervened.  To  grant  this,  however, 
does  not  necessarily  collide  with  the  supposition  of  a 
relatively  primitive  cast  in  the  teachings  of  the  first  part 
of  Acts.  Written  memorials  probably  antedated  the 
time  when  Luke  wrote,  and  were  utilized  by  him. 
Many  scholars  think  that  they  find  evidence  that  this 
was  the  case,  though  the  documentary  basis  does  not 
stand  out  prominently  on  account  of  the  free  way  in 
which  Luke  used  his  materials.^  But  let  the  method  of 
composition  have  been  what  it  may,  the  theology  of  this 
portion  of  the  New  Testament  has  unmistakably  a  simple, 
unelaborated,  archaic  cast.  Critics  like  Holtzmann,  while 
very  free  to  challenge  the  historical  character  of  various 
features  in  the  opening  chapters  of  Acts,  confess  that 
their  theology,  especially  as  embodied  in  the  reported 
speeches  of  Peter,  conveys  an  impression  of  a  primitive 
Christian  consciousness.^ 

2.  The  second  of  the  canonical  books  which  may  be 
given  a  place  under  the  title  of  the  present  chapter  is 

1  Among  those  who  have  expressed  doubt  as  to  the  possibility  of  dis- 
tinguishing successfully  the  sources  of  Acts  are  Baur,  Schwegler,  Hil- 
genfeld,  Weizsacker,  Holtzmann,  Beyschlag,  Pfleiderer,  and  Riehm. 
On  the  other  hand,  Zeller,  Overbeck,  Wendt,  J.  Weiss,  and  Jiingst  have 
favored  the  possibility  of  discriminating  these  sources,  at  least  to  a  con- 
siderable extent. 

2  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  I.  374.  Compare  Schmiedel,  article 
"Acts"  in  Encyclopaedia  Biblica. 


126  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  Epistle  of  James,  As  in  case  of  Acts,  the  warrant 
for  including  this  epistle  here  has  little  to  do  with  chro- 
nology. In  fact,  on  the  point  of  the  date  of  the  Epistle 
of  James  critical  opinion  is  widely  divided.  One  theory 
makes  it  among  the  earliest,  if  not  the  earliest,  book  of 
the  New  Testament.  According  to  another  theory  it  is 
a  second  century  writing  and  one  of  the  very  latest  in 
the  canon.  The  advocates  of  the  former  allege  :  (i)  One 
who  wished  without  good  warrant  to  pose  as  a  leader, 
and  to  assume  the  prerogative  to  address  fellow-Christians 
at  large,  would  naturally  have  been  inclined  to  borrow 
a  high  title.  Accordingly  the  modest  title  employed, 
namely,  "  servant  of  God  and  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ," 
bespeaks  faith  in  the  honesty  of  the  writer,  and  makes 
it  credible  that  he  was  actually  a  man  of  essentially 
apostolic  rank,  such  as  James  of  Jerusalem  is  known  to 
have  been.  (2)  The  absence  of  any  reference  to  the 
antithesis  between  the  Mosaic  law  and  the  grace  of 
Christ  is  a  token  of  a  time  anterior  to  the  controversy  in 
which  Paul  faced  the  Judaizers  and  argued  so  vehemently 
for  Christian  freedom.  (3)  If  it  is  to  be  concluded  that 
either  of  the  two  took  note  of  the  statements  of  the 
other,  it  is  more  likely  that  Paul  repeated  words  of  James 
and  guarded  against  a  one-sided  meaning  that  might 
easily  be  put  upon  them  chan  that  James  undertook  to 
criticise  statements  of  Paul.  (4)  Were  the  Epistle  of 
James  a  late  writing,  we  should  expect  to  find  in  it  more 
traces  of  the  Christian  dialect  as  modified  by  the  in- 
fluence of  Paul's  writings. 

In  behalf  of  the  opposing  view  it  is  claimed  :  (i)  There 
is  no  certain  witness  to  the  existence  of  the  Epistle  of 


TEACHING  AKm  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       12/ 

James  before  the  time  of  Origen.  Some  portions  of 
First  Peter,  First  Clement,  and  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas 
resemble,  it  is  true,  statements  in  the  Epistle  of  James. 
But  the  resemblances  in  most  instances  are  not  very 
specific,  and  can  be  explained  on  the  ground  of  the 
familiarity  of  the  writers  with  the  same  sources.  More- 
over, if  this  explanation  should  be  regarded  as  inadequate 
for  certain  items  of  resemblance,  it  would  still  stand  in 
question  whether  James  was  not  the  borrower.  So  far 
at  least  as  First  Peter  is  concerned  criticism  is  inclined 
to  affirm  that  the  debt  was  on  the  side  of  James.  (2) 
The  epistle  in  several  passages  gives  a  picture  of  a  world- 
liness  and  spiritual  poverty  which  cannot  be  supposed  to 
have  been  characteristic  of  an  age  of  primitive  zeal  and 
purity,  a  picture  which  is  first  paralleled  in  the  second 
century  writing,  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas.  (3)  The  epistle 
in  its  references  to  law  never  denotes  the  Mosaic  code  in 
its  historic  sense.  It  uses  the  word  rather  in  an  abstract 
and  general  sense,  such  as  one  brought  up  in  Judaism 
and  imbued  with  its  associations  would  not  naturally 
have  appropriated.  The  usage  is  a  sign  of  a  very  con- 
siderable journey  from  the  plane  of  Jewish  thought  and 
association.  (4)  The  epistle  is  shown  to  be  post-Pauline 
in  that  it  presupposes  an  abuse  of  Pauline  formulas  and 
takes  pains  sharply  to  correct  the  abuse. 

Our  purpose  does  not  make  it  necessary  closely  to 
weigh  the  relative  force  of  these  opposing  lines  of  argu- 
ment. We  content  ourselves  with  expressing  the  con- 
viction that  the  Epistle  of  James  must  be  regarded  as 
post-Pauline,  at  least  subsequent  to  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans.     Mayor  and  Zahn,  who  contend  for  the  early 


128  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

date  of  the  epistle,  equally  with  Harnack,  Jiilicher,  and 
Holtzmann,  who  argue  for  a  late  date,  admit  that  the 
parallelism  between  certain  expressions  in  the  two  epistles 
shows  that  one  of  them  took  account  of  the  other.  The 
parallelism  is  certainly  very  marked.  Paul  says,  **  If 
Abraham  was  justified  by  works,  he  hath  whereof  to 
glory"  (Rom.  iv.  2.)  James  says,  *'Was  not  Abraham 
our  father  justified  by  works,  in  that  he  offered  up  Isaac 
his  son  upon  the  altar  ? "  (ii.  21).  Paul  says,  "  We  reckon 
therefore  that  a  man  is  justified  by  faith  apart  from  the 
works  of  the  law"  (Rom.  iii.  28).  James  says,  "Ye 
see  that  by  works  a  man  is  justified  and  not  only  by 
faith"  (ii.  24).  It  is  to  be  noticed  too  that  in  citing 
Gen.  XV.  6,  in  connection  with  the  verses  quoted,  both 
epistles  differ  in  the  same  way  from  the  Septuagint, 
reading  kirCcTevcrev  he  instead  of  Koi  eTTLarevo-ev.  Now,  it 
is  next  to  impossible  that  such  a  list  of  verbal  corres- 
pondences should  have  been  simply  accidental ;  and  we 
are  only  left  to  ask  which  epistle  took  account  of  the 
other.  Here  we  cannot  agree  with  Mayor  and  some 
others  who  hold  that  the  reference  is  on  the  side  of 
Romans.  The  language  of  James  gives  more  the  im- 
pression of  a  direct  challenge  than  that  of  Paul,  and  the 
natural  conclusion  is  that  the  challenged  sentiment  had 
already  been  given  unequivocal  expression.  Moreover, 
there  is  nothing  known  to  us  in  the  early  history  of 
Christianity  which  suggests  that  any  occasion  for  such  a 
strain  as  that  of  James  could  have  arisen  before  Paul's 
struggle  with  the  Judaizers  had  led  him  to  proclaim  in 
most  emphatic  terms  the  primacy  of  faith  in  the  matter 
of  justification.     The  supposition  that  the  occasion  came 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       129 

to  James  from  the  side  of  Judaism  is  not  by  any  means 
adapted  to  carry  conviction.  Sentences  emphatically 
laudatory  of  faith  may  indeed  have  been  spoken  by 
some  of  the  rabbis.  But  there  is  no  assurance  that 
expressions  of  this  order,  even  if  extant  at  all  in  the 
apostolic  age,  were  sufficiently  current  to  be  likely  to 
influence  those  addressed  by  James.  Then,  too,  it  is  to 
be  noticed  that  the  use  of  strong  words  in  praise  of  the 
virtue  of  faith  is  quite  a  different  matter  from  openly 
drawing  an  antithesis  between  faith  and  works  to  the 
abridgment  of  the  province  of  the  latter  in  relation  to 
salvation.  We  surmise  that  investigation  can  never 
make  credible  the  supposition  that  a  procedure  of  this 
sort  was  sufficiently  current  in  the  Judaism  of  the  first 
century  to  create  a  strong  demand  for  rebuttal.  Surely 
not  a  sentence  of  the  Gospels  or  of  the  Pauline  epistles 
conveys  the  impression  that  it  was  characteristic  of  con- 
temporary Judaism  to  hold  up  the  notion  of  salvation  by 
the  way  of  faith  as  opposed  to  that  of  works.  The 
natural  inference  from  these  records  is  the  very  opposite. 
Let  it  be  observed  that  the  question  here  is  not  whether 
James  was  seriously  apart  from  Paul  in  doctrinal  thinking. 
The  question  is  rather,  Did  he  criticise  verbal  statements 
which  are  actually  found  with  Paul,  and  which  may  be 
presumed  to  have  come  to  his  notice  either  by  the  cita- 
tion of  another  from  an  epistle  of  Paul  or  by  his  own 
perusal  of  such  epistle  ?  This  latter  question  we  are 
constrained  to  answer  in  the  affirmative  on  the  grounds 
just  stated .1     But  while  granting  chronological  posteri- 

^  Mayor,  in  his  Commentary,  endeavors  to  support  his  contention  for 
the  priority  of  the  epistle  of  James  by  citing  several  statements  in  the 


130  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ority,  we  may  still  affirm  affiliation  with  a  primitive 
theological  type.  Whether  later  than  Romans  by  a 
short  or  a  long  interval,  the  Epistle  of  James  is  asso- 
ciated with  an  early  stage  of  doctrinal  construction.  By 
general  consent  it  has  numerous  points  of  connection 
with  the  Synoptical  teaching,  especially  with  the  sermon 
on  the  mount  as  reported  by  Matthew.^  It  is  essentially 
a  compendium  of  Jewish-Christian  ethics.  In  so  slight 
a  degree  does  it  reflect  matured  Christian  theology  that 
a  respectable  critic  has  contended  that  the  epistle,  with 
the  exception  of  two  or  three  brief  interpolations,  was 
of  pre-Christian  origin.^  But  this  is  an  extreme  view, 
and  is  of  course  refuted  by  all  evidence  of  reference  to 
the  letter  of  Paul's  teaching,  not  to  speak  of  the  non- 
Jewish  sense  in  which  the  term  "  law  "  is  used. 

3.  A  third  writing  may  be  included  under  the  title 
of  the  chapter,  though  perhaps  by  a  right  somewhat 
more  subject  to  dispute  than  that  which  can  be  claimed 
for  the  foregoing  writings.     Some  features  of  the  Apoc- 


Pauline  writings  which  resemble  sentences  in  the  former.  But  the 
resemblance  is  quite  vague ;  and  when  it  is  observed  that  the  same 
writer  specifies  not  less  than  seventy  points  in  which  the  epistle  shows 
connection  with  the  canonical  Hebrew  Scriptures,  as  many  points  of 
connection  with  Philo,  more  than  thirty  with  Ecclesiasticus,  and  not  less 
than  forty  with  the  Synoptical  tradition  as  reported  by  Matthew,  it  must 
be  felt  that  the  approaches  in  Paul  to  the  words  or  sentiments  of  James 
are  in  general  explained  by  reference  to  the  common  sources,  written 
and  oral,  which  influenced  their  thought  and  speech.  Furthermore  the 
superior  force  and  originality  of  Paul  suggest  that,  in  so  far  as  there  is 
any  evidence  of  copying,  the  probability  is  that  James  was  the  copyist. 

1  Compare  in  order  Matt.  v.  3,  v.  34-37,  vi.  19,  vi.  24,  vii.  i,  vii.  16 
with  James  ii.  5,  v.  12,  v.  2,  3,  iv.  4,  iv.  ii,  12,  iii.  10-13. 

*  Such  was  the  theory  of  Spitta, 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       131 

alypse  associate  it  in  a  measure  with  the  Johannine 
Gospel  and  Epistles.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is 
rather  broadly  contrasted  in  its  tone  with  these  books, 
and  it  contains  distinct  points  of  connection  with  the 
primary  stage  of  Christian  thought.  While  purely 
Christian  ideas  are  not  wanting,  there  is  much  of  a  Jew- 
ish-Christian cast  to  the  book.  Jerusalem  is  viewed  as 
the  religious  centre  of  the  world,  and  is  spoken  of  as  the 
"holy  city"  and  the  "beloved  city."  ^  Heaven  is  repre- 
sented as  containing  a  temple  in  which  the  ark  of  God's 
covenant  is  revealed.^  Christ  is  described  as  the  root  of 
David  and  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  in  una- 
dulterated Old  Testament  phrase  is  set  forth  as  ruling 
the  nations  with  a  rod  of  iron.^  The  hundred  and  forty- 
four  thousand  servants  of  God  who  are  sealed  upon  their 
foreheads  are  represented  as  taken  from  the  tribes  of 
Israel,  twelve  thousand  from  each  tribe,*  and  the  names 
of  these  tribes  are  inscribed  upon  the  twelve  gates  of 
the  heavenly  city.^  There  is  also  a  reminder  of  the  Ju- 
daic standpoint  in  the  prominence  which  is  given  to  the 
fear  of  God  as  an  element  of  piety.^  Moreover,  the 
intense  antipathy  to  Roman  rule  which  breathes  through 
the  Apocalypse  is  in  line  with  the  implacable  Jewish 
hostility  which  precipitated  the  desperate  struggle  with 
the  overmastering  power  of  Rome,  and  stands  in  marked 
contrast  with  the  deferential  attitude  toward  the  imperial 
government  which  is  characteristic  of  the  Pauline  Epis- 
tles and  the  Book  of  Acts.     This  contrast,  it  may  be 

1  xi.  2,  XX.  9.  *  vii.  3-8. 

2xi.  19.     Of.  XV.  5,  8.  ^xxi.  12. 

*xii.  5,  xix.  15.  6xi.  18,  xiv.  7,  xv.  4,  xix,  5. 


132  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

granted,  is  partly  explained,  at  least  so  far  as  relates  to 
the  Pauline  Epistles,  by  the  extraordinary  provocation 
which  was  given  by  the  Neronian  persecution. 

It  is  this  implication  of  the  Apocalypse  with  Judaism 
which  justifies  its  being  associated  with  a  primitive  type 
of  Christian  teaching.  In  respect  of  date  there  is  no 
reason  to  doubt  that  the  Apocalypse  is  post-Pauline. 
Though  Epiphanius  in  the  early  Church  used  language 
which  suggests  that  he  associated  its  origin  with  the 
reign  of  Claudius,  it  has  been  a  well-nigh  universal  opin- 
ion among  scholars  that  the  book  as  a  whole  was  com- 
posed at  least  after  the  reign  of  Nero. 

If  the  Apocalypse  be  taken  as  a  unity  and  its  com- 
position be  assigned  to  a  definite  limited  period,  then 
the  competing  dates  will  be  the  reign  of  Domitian  (8i- 
96)  and  the  years  intervening  between  the  death  of  Nero 
and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  (68-70).  In  behalf  of 
the  later  or  Domitian  era  the  following  considerations 
have  been  urged:  (i)  Early  tradition,  as  reported  by 
Irenaeus,  places  the  composition  of  the  Apocalypse  in 
this  era,  and  there  is  no  opposing  tradition  to  which 
equal  weight  can  be  attached.  (2)  The  picture  of  Chris- 
tian suffering  and  martyrdom  in  the  book  implies  a  per- 
secution of  wider  extent  than  the  local  onset  of  Nero  at 
the  capital,  and  reflects  conditions  which  are  not  known 
to  have  prevailed  before  the  time  of  Domitian.  (3)  The 
Apocalypse  contains  traces  of  the  legend  of  Nero's  des- 
tined return  after  his  supposed  death.  According  to  the 
earlier  form  of  this  legend,  which  seems  to  have  had 
considerable  currency,  the  tyrant  did  not  really  die,  but 
was  hidden  away  in  the  East  among  the  Parthians,  and 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       133 

was  destined  to  regain  the  sovereignty  of  the  empire. 
According  to  the  later  form  of  the  legend  he  was  to  re- 
appear as  raised  from  the  dead.  This  form  naturally 
superseded  the  earlier  as  time  wore  on,  and  there  was 
reason  to  doubt  the  fact  of  Nero's  having  been  preserved 
alive.  In  either  form  the  legend  might  be  expected  to 
require  an  appreciable  interval  to  gain  recognition  in 
Christian  literature,  while  an  outcropping  of  the  second 
form  in  any  writing  would  be  an  unequivocal  token  that 
it  was  composed  two  or  three  decades  after  the  death  of 
Nero.  Now  the  representation  that  the  beast,  which 
may  be  regarded  as  a  symbol  of  the  tyrant,  was  and  is 
not  and  is  about  to  come  up  out  of  the  abyss  (xvii.  8),  at 
least  suggests  the  notion  of  an  invasion  from  the  region 
of  the  dead,  and  so  may  be  taken  as  a  mark  of  the  Do- 
mitian  era.  (4)  The  inclusion  in  the  list  of  the  Asiatic 
churches  of  several  not  brought  to  notice  in  the  career 
of  Paul,  the  rebuke  of  some  of  them  for  a  decline  in 
Christian  zeal,  and  the  mention  of  the  presence  of  hereti- 
cal teachers  are  items  that  are  best  explaimed  on  the 
supposition  that  the  record  was  made  quite  late  in  the 
century.  A  like  import  may  be  ascribed  to  several  other 
items,  such  as  the  appearance  of  the  phrase  "  the  Lord's 
day"  (i.  10),  and  the  representation  that  the  twelve 
apostles  have  their  names  inscribed  on  the  foundations 
of  the  wall  of  the  heavenly  city  (xxi.  14)  —  a  stretch  of 
honor  more  likely  to  have  been  accorded  in  the  post- 
apostolic  age  than  in  the  apostolic. 

In  this  line  of  evidences  those  under  the  first  and 
second  specifications  may  properly  be  regarded  as  hav- 
ing most  weight.     The  third  specification  deals  with  a 


134  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

problematical  topic,  while  most  of  the  items  under  the 
fourth  have  very  little  evidential  value.^ 

The  principal  grounds  for  preferring  the  earlier  date 
are  the  following:  (i)  The  most  primitive  tradition  in 
the  main  assigned  the  Apocalypse  to  the  same  author  to 
whom  it  accredited  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  identified  this 
author  with  the  Apostle  John.  Now  this  tradition,  so 
far  as  it  has  any  weight,  speaks  for  a  relatively  early 
date  as  the  probable  time  of  the  composition  of  the 
Apocalypse.  It  is  next  to  impossible  to  believe  that  it 
could  have  been  written  by  the  apostle  after  the  com- 
position of  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  it  greatly  facilitates 
the  explanation  of  the  contrast  between  the  two  to  sup- 
pose that  it  was  written  a  couple  of  decades  earlier. 
Its  fiery  energy  is  consonant  with  the  supposition  that  it 
belonged  to  the  era  when  the  Boanerges  spirit  in  John 
had  not  been  fully  toned  down.  Its  Hebraic  tinge  also 
favors  the  earlier  stage  in  the  author's  development, 
while  both  the  milder  tone  and  purer  Greek  of  the 
fourth  Gospel  point  to  mature  years  and  a  prolonged 
residence  in  a  Greek-speaking  community.  The  tradi- 
tion respecting  identity  of  authorship  on  the  part  of  the 
Apocalypse  and  the  fourth  Gospel  may  indeed  be  chal- 
lenged, but  if  Irenaeus  is  to  be  followed  in  ascribing  both 
writings  to  John,  there  are  very  fair  reasons  for  doubting 
the  correctness  of  his  report  as  to  the  date  of  the  former. 
(2)  The  interval  between  68  and  70,  lying  between  the 
fearful  onslaught  of  Nero  against  the  Christians  and  the 
impending  downfall  of  Jerusalem,  was  a  time  well  calcu- 

1  Compare  Terry,  Apocalyptics,  p.  257;  Hirscht,  Die  Apokalypse 
und  ihre  neueste  Kritik,  pp.  25-28,  158,  159. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       135 

lated  to  stir  to  such  an  impassioned  outburst  as  is  con- 
tained in  the  Apocalypse.  (3)  There  are  items  in  the 
book  which  are  most  easily  and  naturally  interpreted  on 
the  ground  that  its  composition  fell  within  the  specified 
interval,  not  having  taken  place  later  than  the  first 
months  of  the  year  70.  For  example,  the  maximum 
ordeal  represented  as  visited  upon  Jerusalem  is  simply 
an  earthquake  which  destroys  a  tenth  part  of  the  city 
and  seven  thousand  of  the  people  (xi.  13).  A  more 
emphatic  description  of  harm  and  desolation  would  natu- 
rally have  found  place  had  the  writer  been  able  to  look 
back  upon  the  tragic  fate  of  the  city  at  the  hands  of  the 
Roman  spoilers.  Again  in  chapters  xiii  and  xvii  a  line 
of  seven  emperors,  corresponding  to  the  seven  heads  of 
the  beast  symbolizing  Roman  rule,  is  mentioned.  Five, 
it  is  said,  have  fallen,  one  is,  and  the  seventh  is  still  to 
come.  If  we  begin  the  count  with  Octavian  (Augustus), 
we  find  the  fifth  in  Nero,  and  identify  the  time  of  writ- 
ing as  the  reign  of  Galba ;  or,  if  Galba,  Otho  and  Vitel- 
lius  be  supposed  to  have  been  passed  by,  as  not  gaining 
a  proper  place  in  the  succession,  then  the  first  days  of 
Vespasian  in  69-70  would  be  the  time  of  writing.^  At 
least  this  would  be  the  conclusion,  unless  it  be  supposed 
that  the  apparent  standpoint  of  the  author  was  a  mere 


1  In  virtue  of  the  eminernce  of  his  position  Julius  Caesar  might  con- 
ceivably be  reckoned  as  the  first  in  the  list.  But  the  regular  imperial 
succession  began  with  Octavian.  It  was  first  upon  him  that  the  title 
Augustus  —  Se^ao-Tos  —  was  bestowed,  and  there  is  some  reason  to 
think  that  this  name,  which  was  claimed  likewise  by  his  successors,  is 
referred  to  in  the  mention  of  "  names  of  blasphemy  "  as  inscribed  upon 
the  heads  of  the  beast.  Any  reason  for  identifying  the  wounded  head 
with  Nero  would  also  direct  to  Octavian  as  the  first  in  the  list. 


136  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

device,  and  that  what  is  pictured  in  these  chapters  as 
future  was  not  really  future ;  but  this  is  a  strained  as- 
sumption, the  motive  for  choosing  the  viewpoint  after 
the  fifth  king  being  quite  decidedly  in  need  of  explana- 
tion, if  that  was  not  the  real  viewpoint  of  the  writer. 
Taken  in  conjunction  with  the  item  in  chapter  xi 
respecting  the  limited  judgment  on  Jerusalem,  the  con- 
tent of  chapters  xiii  and  xvii  favors  the  time  proximate 
to  the  death  of  Nero. 

The  evidence  deduced  from  these  two  chapters  may 
be  regarded  as  affected  by  the  presence  of  the  legend  of 
Nero's  return,  if  indeed  that  legend  is  found  here,  and 
especially  if  it  is  found  in  its  later  form.  That  the 
legend  is  properly  discoverable  in  any  form  is  not  the 
unanimous  verdict  of  criticism.  It  must  be  admitted, 
however,  that  recent  criticism  shows  a  marked  tendency 
to  take  the  affirmative  on  this  point.  It  must  also  be 
granted  that  what  is  said  in  chapters  xiii  and  xvii  of 
one  of  the  seven  heads  appearing  as  though  smitten 
unto  death,  then  being  healed,  and  subsequently  reap- 
pearing and  in  conjunction  with  allies  taking  vengeance 
on  the  great  city,  has  rather  remarkable  points  of  corre- 
spondence with  the  popular  legend  about  Nero.  It  is  in 
place,  therefore,  to  inquire,  supposing  the  legend  to  be 
actually  mirrored  in  these  representations,  have  we  here 
a  decisive  note  of  a  date  near  to  the  end  of  the  century .? 
To  this  question  it  is  possible  to  render  a  negative 
answer.  The  Nero  legend  in  its  first  form  appeared 
soon  after  the  death  of  the  tyrant,  which  occurred  in 
June  of  the  year  68.  Within  a  year  from  that  time  a 
pseudo  Nero  had  come  forward  and  been  the  cause  of 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       137 

commotions  in  Asia  Minor  and  Greece. ^  In  the  region 
of  the  apocalyptic  writer  there  may  have  been  at  this 
time  a  specially  intense  excitement  over  the  matter,  and 
hence  as  tempting  an  occasion  to  enrich  apocalyptic 
symbolism  from  this  source  as  was  ever  afforded.  It  is 
not  incredible,  then,  that  the  Nero  legend  in  its  first 
form  should  have  been  thus  early  appropriated.  In  its 
second  form,  doubtless,  it  could  not  have  been  appropri- 
ated at  that  juncture,  unless  the  thought  of  the  revelator 
was  quite  in  advance  of  popular  expectation.  The  perti- 
nent inquiry  concerns,  accordingly,  the  form  in  which 
the  legend  appears.  On  this  point  the  grounds  of  judg- 
ment are  not  very  decisive.  It  may  be  said,  however, 
that  there  is  no  compelling  evidence  for  the  assumption 
that  the  first  form  of  the  legend  is  transcended  in  the 
viewpoint  of  the  Apocalypse.  Nero  robbed  of  all  the 
glory  of  imperial  rule,  driven  out  as  a  fugitive,  under- 
going apparently  a  fatal  wounding  by  the  sword,  could 
be  described,  without  any  excess  of  poetical  license,  as 
being  the  subject  of  a  deadly  stroke  and  as  brought  to 
naught,  even  though  it  was  suspected  that  he  did  not 
actually  die.  The  fact  that  his  reappearing  is  pictured 
as  an  issuing  from  the  abyss  may  seem  indeed  to  con- 
nect him  with  the  region  of  the  dead.  But  it  is  to  be 
noticed  that  the  torturing  locusts  with  their  prince  are 
also  represented  as  issuing  from  the  abyss,  (ix.  2,  3,  11.) 
A  suggestion  is  thus  given  that  this  form  of  expression 
was  used  in  connection  with  Nero  rather  to  emphasize 
his  association  with  the  demoniacal  power  which  rages 
up  from  beneath  than  to  depict  an  actual  resurrection. 

1  Tacitus,  Hist.  ii.  8,  9. 


138  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

It  may  be  affirmed,  too,  that  a  writer  who  was  thinking 
of  the  resurrection  of  one  who  had  been  dead  for  a  score 
of  years  could  scarcely  have  been  inclined  to  describe 
his  being  raised  up  as  the  healing  of  a  wound.  The 
reference  to  the  beast  as  one  "  who  hath  the  stroke  of 
the  sword  and  yet  lived"  (xiii.  14)  conveys  rather  the  idea 
of  a  marvellous  recovery  from  a  deadly  thrust  than  the 
notion  of  a  resurrection  of  one  long  dead.  Thus  the 
evidence  adduced  from  the  list  of  kings  in  chapters  xiii 
and  xvii  for  the  earlier  of  the  competing  dates  is  not 
necessarily  regarded  as  cancelled  by  the  Nero  legend  in 
the  form  in  which  it  has  gained  a  place  in  the  Apocalypse, 
if  indeed  it  has  gained  a  place  there. 

Whatever  may  be  thought  of  the  relative  weight  of 
the  two  lines  of  evidence  bearing  on  the  date  of  the 
Apocalypse,  it  is  not  easy  to  nullify  altogether  the  force 
of  one  or  another  evidence  in  either  line.  This  fact  has 
come  very  largely  to  be  recognized  by  scholars,  and  has 
led  to  qualifications  of  one  kind  or  another  being  placed 
upon  the  unity  of  the  book.  The  judgment  has  been 
gaining  currency  that  if  the  writing  was  composed  in  the 
age  of  Domitian  it  must  have  incorporated  materials 
belonging  to  an  earlier  period,  and  if  it  was  written  no 
later  than  the  first  days  of  Vespasian  it  was  probably  sup- 
plemented and  pubHshed  in  Domitian's  reign.  Among 
those  who  regard  the  evidences  for  a  more  or  less  com- 
posite structure  as  conclusive,  much  variety  of  opinion 
has  been  manifested.  Some  have  supposed  that  the 
writer  dealt  with  documents  of  very  appreciable  extent, 
others  that  his  borrowing  was  confined  to  matters  of 
limited  compass,   such  as   single  visions.     Some  have 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        139 

magnified  the  tokens  of  a  Jewish  basis,  others  have  re- 
garded the  sources  as  predominantly,  if  not  exclusively, 
Christian.^  Without  looking  specifically  into  these  theo- 
ries or  attempting  to  weigh  their  merits  in  detail,  we 
content  ourselves  with  expressing  the  conviction  that  a 
predominantly  Christain  character  pertains  to  the  Apoca- 
lypse, and  also  that  it  is  marked  to  so  large  a  degree  by 
unity  of  style  that  it  seems  probable  that  the  greater 
part  of  it  at  least  was  from  the  hand  of  a  single  writer, 
who  used  a  good  degree  of  freedom  to  shape  his  materials 
according  to  his  own  bent.  At  the  same  time,  we  are 
quite  willing  to  grant  with  Weizsacker,  Bousset,  Porter, 
and  others,  that  the  writer  was  ambitious  to  utilize 
apocalyptic  materials  at  hand,  and  so  gave  place  to  some 
things  that  he  could  not  bring  into  a  unified  and  well- 
connected  scheme.^  We  can  readily  admit,  furthermore, 
the  possibility  that  the  publishing  of  the  book  may  have 
been  separated  by  a  considerable  period  from  the  time 
of  the  original  composition,  and  that  some  items  may 
have  been  incorporated  at  the  time  of  publication.  The 
theme  is  not  one  that  invites  to  complete  confidence. 

1  Classifying  from  this  point  of  view,  Rauch  distinguishes  these 
groups :  (i)  Those  who  hold  that  the  Apocalypse  has  a  purely  Christian 
character — Volter,  Weizsacker,  Erbes,  Pressense.  (2)  Those  who  re- 
gard the  book  as  a  Jewish  work  wrought  over  by  a  Christian  hand  — 
Vischer,  Iselin,  Rovers,  Weyland,  P.  Schmidt,  O.  Holtzmann,  O.  Pflei- 
derer.  (3)  Those  who  regard  the  Apocalypse  as  a  Christian  work  with 
Jewish  additions  —  Schoen,  Sabatier,  Spitta. 

2  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  II.  173;  Bousset,  Die  Offenbarung 
Johannis  (Meyer's  Series),  pp.  143-154;  Porter,  The  Messages  of  the 
Apocalyptic  Writers,  pp.  180,  181.  Among  the  passages  which  inter- 
fere with  the  continuity  of  the  writing,  vii.  1-8,  x-xi.  13,  and  xii  are 
specified. 


140  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

To  assume  to  know  all  about  the  composition  of  the 
Apocalypse  is  a  sure  way  to  make  conspicuous  one's 
lack  of  adequate  information. 


II.  —  The  Teaching  of  the  First  Part  of  the 
Book  of  Acts. 

I.  This  book  begins  with  the  thought  of  the  kingdom, 
and  then  goes  on  to  give  an  account  of  the  progress  of 
the  Church  in  the  face  of  Jewish  opposition.  Primarily 
both  the  one  and  the  other  term  had  in  the  minds  of  the 
disciples  a  close  association  with  Judaism.  The  form  of 
the  question  which  the  assembled  disciples  asked,  namely, 
"  Dost  thou  at  this  time  restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel  ? " 
indicates  that  they  still  clung  to  the  idea  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom  as  a  \isible  realm  having  its  centre  in  the  Old 
Testament  community.  The  import  of  Christ's  message 
on  the  kingdom  had  not  yet  been  adequately  grasped. 
It  took  time  to  spiritualize  their  thought  and  bring  it  up 
toward  the  plane  of  the  gospel  conception. 

Probably  in  the  first  instance  the  Church,  or  the  con- 
gregation of  believers,  was  regarded  in  large  part  as 
rather  preliminary  to  the  kingdom  than  as  properly 
identical  with  the  same.  The  grand  distinctive  era  of 
the  kingdom,  it  was  conceived,  would  begin  when  Christ 
should  return.  Then  His  sovereignty  would  be  glori- 
ously displayed.  But  naturally,  as  the  Christian  mes- 
sage went  on  winning  victories,  increasing  account  was 
made  of  the  actual  exercise  of  Christ's  lordship  in  and 
through  the  believing  community,  and  the  thought  of 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       141 

the  Church  and  that  of  the  kingdom  became  in  a  meas- 
ure blended  together. 

The  history  in  Acts  indicates  plainly  that  in  the  years 
immediately  following  Christ's  ascension  the  disciples 
esteemed  the  Church  to  be  not  so  much  a  new  creation 
as  the  consummation  of  the  Old  Testament  order  of 
things,  the  assembly  of  the  true  spiritual  Israel,  the  elect 
portion  of  the  Jewish  people  which  had  enough  of  the 
spirit  of  faith  and  obedience  to  receive  the  Messiah. 
Doubtless  they  expected  that  the  Gentiles  would  share 
in  the  benefits  of  the  gospel  message,  but  not  as  free 
from  the  claims  of  the  Jewish  legal  system.  They  had 
no  design  to  assert  independence  of  that  system.  The 
new-born  life,  however,  was  mightier  than  the  inherited 
form.  The  old  wine-skin  could  not  hold  the  new  wine. 
By  the  irrepressible  impulsion  of  the  spirit  and  teaching 
of  Christ  the  company  of  Christ's  disciples  was  carried 
forward  to  an  independent  position.  This  was  the  inner 
power  working  toward  a  transcendence  of  Judaism.  The 
outward  power  was  a  succession  of  events  well  adapted 
to  promote  the  same  result.  Four  or  five  of  these  are 
specially  noteworthy.  First  came  the  appointment  to 
official  position  of  Hellenists,  Jews  whose  native  lan- 
guage was  Greek,  and  who  on  that  account  had  some- 
what of  a  bond  of  sympathetic  connection  with  the  Gen- 
tile world.  Some  of  the  men  thus  appointed  appear  also 
to  have  been  of  a  rather  bold  and  progressive  spirit. 
Commentators  have  discovered  in  Stephen  a  kind  of 
forerunner  of  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  It  is  noticed 
that  he  was  charged  with  speaking  against  the  temple 
and  the  law.     This  charge  in  the  form  in  which  it  was 


142  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

preferred  most  likely  was  false ;  but  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  Stephen  in  his  speech  before  the  Sanhedrim  took 
pains  to  disparage  the  notion  that  the  divine  presence 
can  be  confined  to  any  temple  which  man  may  build. 
In  saying  this  he  was  not  indeed  going  outside  of  ideas 
formally  acknowledged  by  the  Jews;  but  the  fact  that  he 
said  it  in  that  particular  connection  may  be  construed  as 
a  hint  of  a  somewhat  free  attitude  toward  the  Jewish 
ceremonial  system.     Following  close  upon  the  martyr- 
dom of  Stephen  came  the  persecution  which  scattered 
the  disciples  from  Jerusalem   and   forced  them   into  a 
broader  field.     Then  came  the  preaching  of  Philip  in 
Samaria,  and  the  foundation  of  a  new  Christian  centre 
at  Antioch.     The  lesson  which  Peter  received  in  con- 
nection with  Cornelius  and  his  household  set  the  door 
fairly  ajar  into  the  Gentile  world.     Finally  the  conver- 
sion of  the  most  stringent  and  persecuting  Pharisee  and 
the  penetration  of  his  soul  with  the  conviction  that  the 
way  of  faith,  as  opposed  to  ceremonial  bondage,  is  the 
way  of  salvation,  prepared  for  a  resolute  discarding  of 
Jewish   restrictions    and   for   the    distinct   acknowledg- 
ment, of  the  universal  character  of  Christianity.    A  close 
approach    to    this    consummation    was   reached   at   the 
Council  of  Jerusalem,  held  not  later  than  the  year  52, 
and  placed  by  some   recent   scholars  as    early  as  47.^ 
Even  after  this  date  the  traditional  preference  for  Juda- 
ism asserted  itself  here  and  there,  but  it  was  a  waning 
factor,  and  the  rapid  expansion  of  the  Church  in  the 
Gentile  world  soon  condemned  it  to  impotence. 

The  only  church  officials  who  come  to  view  in  the  first 

1  Harnack,  Chronologie  der  altchristlichen  Literatur,  I.  237. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       143 

five  chapters  of  Acts  are  the  apostles.  That  they  exer- 
cised leadership  is  very  evident ;  that  they  claimed  or 
possessed  a  distinct  governing  supremacy  is  not  appar- 
ent. What  was  urged  in  connection  with  the  choice  of 
one  of  the  disciples  to  fill  the  place  of  Judas  emphasizes 
more  a  teaching  function  than  anything  else.  It  was 
needful,  it  was  said  by  Peter,  to  fill  up  the  list  of 
accredited  witnesses  of  the  resurrection.  In  the  dis- 
charge of  their  leadership  the  apostles  proceeded  rather 
by  way  of  advice  and  suggestion  than  by  that  of  com- 
mand. Matters  of  common  concern  were  submitted  to 
the  whole  assembly,  as  appears  in  the  choice  of  Matthias 
to  the  apostolate  and  the  selection  of  the  seven  to  serve 
in  the  distribution  of  charities.  Peter's  prominence  in 
leadership  is  explained  by  the  traits  of  his  personality, 
his  readiness  in  speech  and  his  resoluteness  in  action. 
Not  a  word  appears  in  the  Book  of  Acts  which  implies 
that  he  had  a  constitutional  primacy,  or  a  headship  of 
governing  authority. 

Next  after  the  apostles  the  first  officers  mentioned  are 
the  seven  whose  appointment  is  recorded  in  the  sixth 
chapter.  In  the  thought  of  the  Church  in  subsequent 
centuries  the  designation  of  these  men  to  their  special 
duties  was  the  origin  of  the  diaconate.  More  properly 
it  may  be  considered  the  historical  germ  of  that  institu- 
tion. The  diaconate  came  by  a  development.  The  ap- 
pointment of  the  Hellenists  to  serve  in  the  distribution 
of  charities  marked  an  initial  stage  of  the  development. 

Of  bishops  there  is  no  mention  in  the  Book  of  Acts 
prior  to  the  account  of  Paul's  last  missionary  journey  be- 
fore his  Roman  captivity.^     Elders  are  first  mentioned 

1  Acts  XX.  28. 


144  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

in  connection  with  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  as  being  at 
hand  to  receive  the  contribution  brought  by  Barnabas 
and  Paul.i  Some  writers  on  apostolic  history  are  of 
opinion  that  at  this  stage  the  term  elders  denoted  rather 
the  senior  members  of  the  congregation  than  officials 
proper.  To  our  mind  there  is  nothing  incredible  in  the 
supposition  that  at  an  early  date  the  demands  of  local 
supervision,  which  naturally  became  urgent  as  congrega- 
tions were  gathered  in  new  and  distant  places,  gave  rise 
to  more  or  less  organized  boards  of  elders.  It  must  be 
granted,  however,  that  the  earlier  epistles  of  Paul,  deal- 
ing as  they  do  with  congregations  as  a  whole,  give  the 
impression  that  officialism  had  not  made  any  great  ad- 
vance by  the  middle  of  the  century.  If  then  we  suppose 
boards  of  presbyters  to  have  been  constituted  at  an  early 
date,  we  are  led  to  conclude  that  no  wide  line  of  cleavage 
subsisted  for  some  time  between  them  and  the  congre- 
gations which  they  served. 

2.  In  relation  to  the  person  and  work  of  Christ  the 
teaching  in  the  first  part  of  Acts  is  comparatively  unde- 
veloped, and  has  some  special  marks  of  connection  with 
Jewish  thinking.  These  characteristics  may  have  been 
due  in  some  measure  to  an  accommodation  in  apostolic 
discourse  to  the  standpoint  of  those  addressed.  Even 
had  Peter's  mind  been  filled  with  such  phrases  relative 
to  Christ  as  are  found  in  Colossians,  Hebrews,  and  the 
Johannine  literature,  it  would  have  been  poor  discretion 
to  dispense  them  in  a  speech  to  unconverted  Jews. 
There  was  reason  for  not  departing  too  widely  from  the 
Jewish  plane  of  thought  on  the  nature  and  vocation  of 

1  Acts  xi.  30.     See  also  xiv.  23. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       145 

the  Messiah.  But  the  motive  for  accommodated  speech 
is  not  the  whole  explanation  of  the  forms  of  expression 
that  were  used  in  characterizing  Christ's  person  and 
work.  The  minds  of  the  disciples  were  at  an  initial 
theological  stage  on  this  theme,  and  they  naturally  ex- 
pressed themselves  in  terms  which  stand  somewhat  in 
contrast  with  the  completed  New  Testament  phraseology. 
Especially  noticeable  is  the  recurring  reference  to  Christ 
as  the  Servant  of  God,  irah  6eov}  It  gives  us  the  im- 
pression of  being  transferred  back  to  the  Old  Testament 
to  find  this  designation.  The  language  of  Isaiah  evi- 
dently governed  the  choice  of  words  here  rather  than 
the  customary  phraseology  of  Christ.  It  is  also  an  Old 
Testament  form  of  description  which  is  employed  when 
Christ  is  identified  with  the  prophet  like  unto  Moses 
who  was  to  be  raised  up.^  Such  forms  of  description 
evidently  do  not  necessitate  the  predication  of  any  super- 
human rank  in  Christ.  They  could  be  placed  alongside 
the  words,  "Jesus  of  Nazareth,  a  man  approved  of 
God,"  3  as  being  agreeable  to  the  theory  of  the  simple 
humanity  of  Christ.  But  on  the  other  hand  they  cannot 
be  cited  as  denying  superhuman  rank.  In  the  point  of 
view  of  the  New  Testament  writers  generally  Christ  was 
what    these  terms  imply.     That    He  was  also   more  a 

1  Acts,  iii.  13,  26,  iv.  27,  30.  While  usage  on  the  whole  dictates  that 
Trats  should  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  "  servant,"  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  instances  occur  both  in  Jewish  and  early  Christian  literature  where 
the  word  may  be  regarded  as  closely  affiliated  in  meaning  with  the  term 
"child"  or  "son."  See  Wisdom  of  Solomon,  ii.  13,  16,  18;  Matt.  xii. 
18;  Clement  of  Rome,  Epist.,  lix.  2-4;  Didache,  ix.  2,  3,  x.  2,  3 ;  Cle- 
ment of  Alexandria,  Strom,  vii.  i. 

2  Acts  iii.  22.  ^ii.  22. 


146  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

number  of  them  took  pains  to  teach  with  sufficient  defi- 
niteness.  These  chapters  of  the  Acts,  too,  are  not  with- 
out intimations  of  the  transcendent  rank  of  Christ.  He 
is  represented  as  having  poured  forth  the  divine  influ- 
ences whose  working  astonished  the  multitude.^  The 
virtue  of  His  name  is  represented  to  be  the  source  of 
miracles  at  the  hands  of  the  apostles, ^  He  is  character- 
ized as  the  Holy  and  Righteous  One  and  the  Prince  of 
Life.3  He  is  addressed  by  Stephen  as  Lord  and  invoked 
to  receive  his  departing  spirit.*  It  is  said  of  the  con- 
verted Paul  that  straightway  he  proclaimed  Jesus  that 
He  is  the  Son  of  God,^  and  Peter  in  his  address  to  the 
household  of  Cornelius  mentioned  as  a  part  of  the  obliga- 
tory Christian  message  the  setting  forth  of  Christ  as 
ordained  to  be  judge  of  the  quick  and  the  dead.^  In  the 
same  address  he  also  spoke  of  Christ  as  Lord  of  all,  that 
is,  of  men  universally,  of  Gentiles  as  well  as  of  Israel.' 
These  expressions  taken  together  may  indeed  fall  short 
of  a  complete  christology ;  but  it  cannot  be  denied  that 
their  tenor  is  in  the  direction  of  assigning  to  Christ  the 
rank  which  more  dogmatic  and  constructive  portions  of 
the  New  Testament  do  assign  to  Him. 

In  defining  the  office  of  Christ  the  chapters  before  us 
observe  complete  silence  about  the  function  of  His  death. 
They  indeed  witness  to  an  effort  to  remove  the  offence 
attached  to  the  death  of  the  Messiah  in  the  thought  of 
the  Jews,  by  proving  from  the  Old  Testament  that  it 
was  included  in  the  divine  purpose.^  It  is  also  natural 
to  suppose  that  the  disciples  who  were  so  sure  that  God 

11133.  3iii.  14,  15.  Six.  20.         'x.  36. 

2111.  6,  16.  *vil.  59,  60.  ^x.  42.  ^U.  23,111. 18,  iv.  27,  28. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       147 

had  a  purpose  in  the  death  of  Christ  took  some  pains  to 
form  an  opinion  on  the  nature  or  content  of  that  purpose. 
But  no  such  opinion  comes  to  expression  in  the  first  part 
of  Acts.  Either  because  they  felt  that  their  views  were 
not  sufficiently  matured,  or  because  they  regarded  the 
minds  of  their  auditors  as  in  no  fit  state  to  receive  a 
message  on  the  subject,  those  who  preached  Christ  in 
the  first  days  of  the  Church  made,  so  far  as  the  record 
shows,  no  attempt  to  define  the  relation  of  His  death  to 
the  economy  of  grace.  Their  impression  that  salvation 
is  through  Christ  was  undoubtedly  strong  and  vital. 
They  speak  of  Christ  as  ''  exalted  to  be  a  prince  and 
saviour,  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  and  remission  of 
sins."  1  They  declare,  *'  In  none  other  is  there  salva- 
tion ;  neither  is  there  any  other  name  under  heaven, 
that  is  given  among  men,  wherein  we  must  be  saved."  ^ 
They  announce  that  "through  His  name  everyone  that 
believeth  on  Him  shall  receive  remission  of  sins."^  By 
statements  like  these  they  clearly  manifested  their  hearty 
faith  in  Christ's  saving  office.  But  at  the  same  time  no 
recorded  word  of  theirs  definitely  relates  the  death  of 
Christ  to  that  office  or  shows  its  place  therein.  On  the 
whole  it  must  be  said  that  in  respect  of  the  person  and 
work  of  Christ  this  portion  of  the  New  Testament  falls 
below  the  plane  of  the  data  contained  in  the  Synoptical 
Gospels.  The  declarations  of  Christ  and  the  revelations 
of  His  self-consciousness  afford  ground  for  larger  induc- 
tions than  are  made  here. 

3.  A  prominent  feature  in  this  section  of  the  New 
Testament  is  the  way  in  which  the  agency  of  the  Holy 

^v.  31.  ^i\.  12.  ^x.  43. 


148  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Spirit  is  brought  to  the  front.  The  primitive  disciples 
evidently  regarded  themselves  as  a  theopneustic  society. 
Within  the  first  fifteen  chapters  of  Acts  there  are  nearly 
two  score  references  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  narratives 
show  an  unhesitating  conviction  on  the  part  of  the  Church 
that  it  was  favored  with  the  immediate  presence  and 
guidance  of  the  Spirit  in  all  important  transactions. 
Tokens  of  His  energetic  working  in  such  signs  as  the 
speaking  in  tongues  seem  to  have  been  regarded  as 
appropriate  accompaniments  of  the  introduction  of  men 
into  the  faith  and  fellowship  of  Jesus.^ 

Stress  upon  the  guidance  and  working  of  the  Spirit 
naturally  gave  much  scope  to  the  idea  of  personal  char- 
isms,  as  opposed  to  officialism  and  ritual.  The  man  who 
furnished  evidence  of  being  inspired  was  granted  large 
liberty  to  exercise  his  gift.  Thus  we  find  that  some  of 
the  seven  went  entirely  beyond  the  eleemosynary  func- 
tion to  which  they  were  appointed,  and  freely  shared  in 
the  ministry  of  the  word  which  the  apostles  counted 
their  special  function. 

As  respects  rites,  no  further  description  is  given  of 
the  eucharist  than  a  mere  reference  to  the  breaking  of 
bread. 2  From  a  consideration  of  such  data  as  early 
Christian  history  affords  it  may  be  concluded  that  this 
language  refers  to  a  common  evening  meal,  which  was 
concluded  with  such  emblems  as  Christ  employed  at  the 
last  supper  with  His  disciples. 

The  central  significance  attached  to  baptism  is  that  of 

lActs  viii.  15-17,  X.  44-46. 

2  Acts  ii.  42,  46.  Compare  i  Cor.  x.  16,  xi.  24.  See  comment  of 
Knowling  on  Acts  ii.  42  in  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  II  94. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       149 

an  open  profession  of  faith  in  Christ  and  acceptance  of 
Him  as  the  ground  of  hope  for  salvation.  In  one  in- 
stance, it  is  true,  a  verbal  connection  is  made  between 
baptism  and  the  remission  of  sins.^  But  even  here  bap- 
tism is  assumed  to  have  its  logical  antecedent  in  repent- 
ance, with  which  faith  holds  a  necessary  relation.  In 
all  the  other  references  to  the  remission  of  sins  this  is 
made  dependent  upon  repentance,  faith,  and  calling  upon 
the  name  of  the  Lord.^  It  is  quite  evident,  therefore, 
that  the  apostle  did  not  think  of  the  bare  rite  of  baptism 
as  bringing  remission,  but  profoundly  emphasized  all  that 
properly  went  with  the  rite  in  the  way  of  spiritual  con- 
ditions, including  repentance,  faith,  and  sincere  confes- 
sion of  Christ.  Viewed  with  a  true  perspective  the  first 
chapters  of  early  Christian  history  must  be  seen  to  assign 
to  baptism  a  subordinate  place  in  the  appropriation  of 
salvation.  In  several  instances  water  baptism  is  put  in 
distinct  antithesis  with  baptism  by  the  spirit  .^  It  may  be 
said  indeed  that  in  these  cases  the  reference  is  to  John's 
baptism.  But  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  in  relation  to 
Christian  baptism  the  performance  of  the  external  rite 
and  the  impartation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  by  no  means 
viewed  as  necessarily  coincident.  On  the  contrary,  the 
two  events  are  assigned  to  different  occasions  in  relation 
to  those  candidates  of  whose  experience  we  have  any 
considerable  account.^  It  was  evidently  no  part  of  the 
conviction  of  the  primitive  disciples  that  the  working  of 
the  Spirit  is  tied  to  baptism. 

In  a  single  instance,  namely  in   the  account  of  the 

lActsii.  38.  8i.  5,  xi.  16. 

2iL  21,  iii.  19,  X.  43,  xiii.  38,  39.  *  viii.  16,  17,  x.  44-48. 


I50  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Samaritan  converts,  a  special  instrumentality  seems  to 
be  assigned  to  the  laying  on  of  hands  in  connection  with 
the  impartation  of  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The 
apostles,  it  is  said,  prayed  for  those  who  had  been  re- 
cently baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus  that  they  might 
receive  the  Holy  Ghost.  "Then  laid  they  their  hands 
upon  them,  and  they  received  the  Holy  Ghost."  ^  Ra- 
tionally, of  course,  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  mere 
laying  on  of  hands  brought  the  Spirit  in  His  regenerating 
and  sanctifying  presence  to  these  persons.  Moreover, 
the  ethical  standpoint  of  the  New  Testament  forbids 
such  a  notion.  The  question  in  this  instance,  it  should 
be  observed,  is  not  so  much  about  a  regenerating  or 
sanctifying  presence  as  about  a  charismatic  presence  — 
a  working  attended  with  some  unmistakable  manifesta- 
tion, like  the  speaking  with  tongues,^  which  indeed  would 
seem  misplaced  in  an  unregenerate  person,  but  yet  is 
not  necessarily  associated  precisely  with  the  effectuation 
of  regeneration.  A  working  of  this  sort  had  the  virtue 
of  a  sign  or  credential,  and  served  the  same  purpose  as 
extraordinary  or  miraculous  occurrences  in  general.  The 
Samaritan  incident,  therefore,  as  belonging  to  an  age  of 
special  credentials  for  Christ's  servants,  is  no  good  war- 
rant for  the  idea  of  a  permanent  tactual  arrangement 
for  imparting  the  grace  of  the  Spirit.  Furthermore, 
nothing  prohibits  us  in  this  particular  case  from  suppos- 
ing that  the  prayers  of  the  apostles  had  quite  as  much 
to  do  with  the  result  attained  as  did  the  imposition  of 
hands. 

iviii.  15-17. 

2  Compare  Hort,  The  Christian  Ecclesia,  p.  54. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        151 

In  referring  to  the  speaking  with  tongues  as  an  extra- 
ordinary sign  or  token  of  spiritual  agency  we  have  ex- 
pressed the  practical  import  which  is  assigned  to  this 
peculiar  gift  in  the  New  Testament  representation  as  a 
whole.  While  a  portion  of  the  vivid  account  of  the 
Pentecostal  scene  might  convey  the  impression  that  the 
gift  of  tongues  was  designed  to  ser\^e  as  a  means  of  com- 
municating information  in  strange  languages,  the  issue 
of  the  story  shows  that  even  in  this  instance  the  gift 
was  rather  a  sign  adapted  to  arrest  attention  and  to  stir 
feeling  than  a  means  of  conveying  instruction,  since  the 
informing  message  was  first  imparted  in  any  adequate 
measure  by  the  speech  of  Peter.  The  narrative  does 
not  necessarily  imply  that  anything  more  was  included 
in  the  extraordinary  utterances  than  brief  exclamations 
in  glorification  of  the  marvellous  grace  of  God.  It  is 
also  to  be  noted  that  there  is  no  need  to  assume  that  the 
languages  in  which  these  exclamations  were  embodied 
were  as  numerous  as  the  nationalities  or  countries  men- 
tioned ;  in  fact,  it  is  probable  that  the  Jews,  gathered 
from  the  fifteen  districts  enumerated,  spoke  either  Greek, 
Eastern  Aramaic,  or  Western  Aramaic,  though  possibly 
with  some  varieties  of  dialect.^  What  has  to  be  admitted, 
accordingly,  if  the  Pentecostal  narrative  is  to  be  approved 
as  based  in  fact,  is  simply  this  :  In  a  state  of  ecstasy  the 
disciples  were  empowered  to  utter  snatches  from  one  or 
another  of  several  languages  with  which  they  were  not 
supposed  to  have  the  requisite  acquaintance.  Thus  in- 
terpreted the  Pentecostal  narrative  will  not  appear  widely 
contrasted    with    other    accounts  of   the  speaking  with 

1  Compare  A.  Robertson,  Hastings'  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  IV.  795. 


152  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

tongues.^  The  distinguishing  item  is  that  the  utterances 
at  Pentecost  were  sufficiently  inteUigible  to  convey  a  dis- 
tinct meaning  to  some  at  least  of  the  hearers,  whereas 
Paul  emphasizes  the  need  of  special  interpretation  of 
any  communication  in  a  tongue.  In  the  primary,  as  in 
all  the  later  instances,  the  speaking  in  tongues  was  an 
ecstatic  experience,  an  experience  rather  of  transporting 
emotion  than  of  reflective  thought.  Its  principal  virtue 
was  to  serve  as  a  very  sensible  and  impressive  token  of 
the  presence  and  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

From  what  has  been  said  on  the  functions  accorded  to 
Christ  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  is  evident  that  a  practical 
trinitarianism  runs  through  the  first  chapters  in  Acts. 
In  the  religious  life  of  the  primitive  Christian  commun- 
ity there  was  a  vital  recognition  of  Father,  Son,  and 
Spirit.  This  recognition,  however,  so  far  as  discoverable, 
did  not  go  beyond  the  practical  stage.  Of  any  attempt 
at  formal  trinitarian  construction  not  a  trace  is  found. 

4.  In  point  of  eschatology  the  chapters  under  consid- 
eration in  no  wise  go  beyond  the  intimations  of  the 
Synoptical  Gospels.  They  contain  only  the  simple  an- 
nouncements that  Christ  is  to  come  again  in  unmistak- 
able personal  manifestation  of  Himself ;  ^  that  He  is 
appointed  to  the  office  of  judging  the  race ;  ^  and  that 
the  heaven  must  receive  Him  till  the  time  of  restitution 
of  all  things.^  This  last  statement  is  best  understood 
in  the  light  of  the  Old  Testament  forecast  of  a  glorious 
consummation  of  the  Messianic  kingdom.  It  points  to 
a  time  when  the  message  of  the  Messiah  shall  have  been 

1  Acts  X,  46,  xix.  6;   i  Cor.  xiv.  ^  x.  42. 

2i.  II.  *iii.  21. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        153 

spread  abroad  through  the  world  and  the  nations  very 
largely  shall  have  become  obedient  to  its  behests. 


III.  —  The  Teaching  of  the  Epistle  of  James. 

1.  Reference  has  been  made  to  the  Jewish  tinge  of 
this  writing.  It  has  in  fact  less  of  a  specifically  Chris- 
tian cast  than  any  other  epistle  in  the  New  Testament 
of  equal  length.  There  is  no  reference  in  it  to  the 
death  or  resurrection  of  Christ  and  no  clear  intimation 
on  the  relation  which  faith  in  Him  sustains  to  salvation. 
His  name  occurs  but  twice.  All  that  is  said  of  Him  is 
comprised  in  these  particulars  :  He  is  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ ;  the  Lord  of  glory  ;  the  Lord  whose  coming  is  at 
hand ;  the  judge  who  standeth  before  the  doors.^  The 
predominance  of  the  ethical  interest  over  the  theo- 
logical may  account  in  part  for  the  paucity  of  reference 
in  the  epistle  to  distinctively  Christian  tenets,  though  it 
may  be  noticed  that  in  some  other  New  Testament 
epistles  occasion  is  taken  to  enforce  ethical  points  by 
reference  to  the  example  of  Christ. 

2.  In  relation  to  the  nature  of  God,  James  gives  prom- 
inence to  immutability  and  absolute  righteousness.  God 
is  He  "with  whom  can  be  no  variation,  neither  shadow 
that  is  cast  by  turning."  ^  He  cannot  be  tempted  with 
evil,  and  He  Himself  tempteth  no  man."  ^  In  two  in- 
stances James  applies  to  God  the  title  "Father";^  but 
it  is  to  be  observed  that  in  the  first  of  these  the  title  has 
reference  only  to  the  divine  authorship  of  nature,  to 

1  James  i.  i,  ii.  i,  7,  v.  8,  9.  ^  ii.  13. 

2  ii.  17.  *  i.  17,  iii.  9. 


154  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  fact  that  God  is  the  creator  of  the  heavenly  orbs 
and  the  ultimate  source  of  their  light.  In  the  second 
instance  it  is  possible  that  the  term  may  have  been 
employed  more  after  the  analogy  of  its  use  in  the 
Gospels.  An  express  reference  to  God's  fatherly  rela- 
tion to  men,  or  to  man's  filial  standing  before  Him,  does 
not  occur  in  the  epistle.  Indirectly,  however,  an  ap- 
proach is  made  to  the  statement  of  this  evangelical  truth, 
since  emphasis  is  put  upon  God's  readiness  to  respond  to 
the  prayer  of  faith,i  and  it  is  said  that  "  the  Lord  is  full 
of  pity,  and  merciful."  ^ 

3.  Very  little  is  contained  in  the  epistle  that  can  be 
construed  into  a  declaration  of  opinion  on  man's  natural 
condition.  James  evidently  had  a  vivid  impression  of 
man's  actual  weakness  and  temptability.  He  had  no 
thought  of  encountering  a  faultless  human  being.  **  In 
many  things,"  he  says,  "we  all  stumble."  ^  The  main 
ground  of  this  sinful  errancy  he  locates  within.  He 
acknowledges  indeed  the  existence  of  a  devil  who  needs 
to  be  resisted  ;*  but  the  characteristic  process  of  sin,  he 
says,  is  on  this  wise  :  "  Each  man  is  tempted  when  he  is 
drawn  away  by  his  own  lust  and  enticed.  Then  the 
lust,  when  it  hath  conceived,  beareth  sin ;  and  the  sin 
when  it  is  full  grown  bringeth  forth  death."  ^  The  origin 
of  this  lust  which  thus  serves  as  the  ground  of  personal 
transgression  is  not  stated.  That  in  some  sense  men 
retain  the  likeness  of  God  is  implied  in  the  way  in  which 
the  author  reprobates  the  cursing  of  men.^    The  language 

1  i.  5.  *  iv.  7. 

2v.  II.  51.14,15. 

8  iii.  2.  ®  iii.  9. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        155 

used,  however,  throws  Httle  light  on  his  view  of  the 
moral  condition  in  which  man  begins  his  earthly  life. 
The  epistle  falls  short  of  a  theory  of  original  sin. 

4.  The  conception  of  religious  life  which  dominates 
the  epistle  is  much  after  the  Old  Testament  order. 
There  is  not  indeed  any  reference  to  the  ceremonial 
requirements  of  the  old  dispensation.  To  that  extent 
the  outlook  is  Christian.  But  Christianity  itself  is  viewed 
preeminently  as  a  scheme  of  law  or  a  code  of  duty. 
Stress  is  placed  upon  the  unity  of  this  law.  To  violate 
it  in  one  point  is  to  show  lack  of  respect  to  it  as  a  whole.^ 
In  two  instances  James  characterizes  the  code  obliga- 
tory on  Christians  as  the  law  of  liberty.^  The  context 
does  not  throw  any  special  light  upon  the  sense  in  which 
the  peculiar  phrase  is  used.  The  suggestion,  however, 
lies  very  near  that  it  was  designed  to  signify  a  law  which 
is  adapted  to  lead  its  faithful  subjects  into  a  true  liberty. 
A  principal  part  of  this  law  no  doubt  was  identified  in 
the  thought  of  the  writer  with  what  he  calls  the  "  royal 
law,"  that  is,  the  law  of  equal  love  to  the  neighbor.^ 

5.  Faith  is  put  by  James  in  contrast  with  wavering 
and  doublemindedness.*  It  is  thus  made  equivalent  to  a 
hearty  confidence  in  God  and  a  steadfast  repose  upon  Him. 
There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  this  was  the  author's 
ruling  conception  of  faith.  But  in  discussing  the  subject 
of  justification  he  permits  the  term  to  be  applied  to  mere 
intellectual  assent,  inasmuch  as  he  speaks  of  it  as  some- 
thing which  a  devil  might  exercise.  Very  likely  James 
would  not  have  denied  that  a  faith  of  this  sort  is  scarcely 
worthy  of  the  name. 

3ii.  8.  M.  6,  7. 


156  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

The  fact  that  in  his  reference  to  justification  James 
admitted  into  the  field  of  vision  this  empty  sort  of  faith 
invites  the  verdict  that  between  his  real  position  and  that 
of  Paul  there  was  less  difference  than  might  be  inferred 
from  their  verbal  antagonism.  If  in  addition  it  be  con- 
cluded that  James  was  thinking  rather  of  \ht  justificatio 
jiisti  than  of  the  jtcstificatio  injiisti^  that  is,  of  a  seal  of 
divine  approbation  put  upon  the  career  of  a  servant  of 
God,  instead  of  the  primary  entrance  into  a  state  of 
reconciliation  with  God,  then  the  difference  will  be  still 
further  abridged.  It  becomes  us,  however,  not  to  overdo 
the  matter  of  reconciliation  by  asserting  that  James  gives 
indubitable  evidence  of  full  agreement  with  Paul.  After 
all  just  allowances  have  been  made  for  a  special  use  of 
terms,  the  fact  remains  that  the  language  of  James  does 
not  safeguard  Paul's  doctrme  of  the  primacy  of  faith. 
While  some  of  the  statements  of  the  former  suggest 
that  faith  is  viewed  as  the  life  of  works,  others  can  be 
construed  as  meaning  that  works  contribute  to  faith 
quite  as  much  as  they  receive  therefrom.  The  total 
discussion  leaves  the  reader  free  to  suppose  that  works 
are  coordinate  with  faith  in  the  ground  of  justification. 
James  guards  well  against  an  antinomian  abuse  of  the 
office  of  faith;  he  does  not  clearly  secure  to  faith,  in 
this  relation,  its  primacy  in  the  attainment  of  salvation. 

In  relation  to  regeneration  the  noticable  feature  is 
the  instrumentality  in  its  effectuation  which  the  epistle 
assigns  to  truth.  The  following  are  its  statements  rela- 
tive to  this  point :  "Of  His  own  will  He  brought  us 
forth  by  the  word  of  truth."  ^  "  Receive  with  meekness 
the  implanted  word  which  is  able  to  save  your  souls."  2 

M.  18.  2i.  21. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        157 

Herein  the  Epistle  of  James  has  a  bond  of  association 
with  the  first  Epistle  of  Peter  and  with  the  fourth 
Gospel. 

6.  The  epistle  gives  very  little  information  respecting 
the  Church.  It  is  addressed  to  the  twelve  tribes  of  the 
Dispersion,  and  refers  to  the  place  of  religious  meeting 
as  a  synagogue.  The  contents,  however,  show  that  it 
was  meant  for  Christian  Jews ;  or,  possibly,  for  Chris- 
tians indiscriminately,  since  "  the  twelve  tribes  of  the 
Dispersion"  can  be  understood  to  be  a  symbolical 
designation  of  the  whole  Christian  body.  The  epistle 
contains  a  single  mention  of  the  Church,  namely  in  the 
injunction  that  the  elders  of  the  Church  should  be  called 
in  to  pray  for  the  sick.  The  fact  that  this  function  is 
devolved  upon  a  plurality  of  members,  taken  in  conjunc- 
tion with  the  direction  for  a  mutual  confession  of  sins, 
speaks  rather  for  a  democratic  than  for  a  priestly  or 
hierarchical  regime. 

7.  In  the  practical  teaching  of  the  epistle  one  of  the 
most  striking  features  is  the  vehemence  with  which  the 
author  lashes  a  disposition  to  do  obeisance  to  the  rich 
and  the  severity  with  which  he  calls  the  rich  to  account. ^ 
Another  special  feature  is  the  stress  placed  upon  com- 
plete abstinence  from  oaths.^  With  many  other  portions 
of  the  New  Testament  the  epistle  is  characterized  by 
an  energetic  inculcation  of  patience  under  trial. 

In  early  Christian  tradition  the  James,  who  has  gener- 
ally been  supposed  to  have  been  the  author,  was  reputed 
to  have  been  an  unsparing  ascetic  in  his  personal  habits. 
The  epistle  by  no  means  discredits  the  tradition ;  but 

^i.  9-1 1,  ii.  1-7,  ▼.  1-6.  2v.  12. 


158  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

on  the  other  hand  it  affords  no  certain  means  of  confir- 
mation. Its  attitude  toward  the  rich  may  have  been 
dictated  by  special  manifestations  of  worldliness  and 
selfishness  on  their  part,  and  is  not  necessarily  taken  as 
an  indication  of  out  and  out  hostility  to  the  idea  of  accu- 
mulating property.  Aside  from  this,  if  the  epistle  con- 
tains any  manifestation  of  a  predilection  for  asceticism, 
it  is  to  be  found  in  this  strong  language  on  the  necessity 
of  renouncing  the  world  :  *'  Know  ye  not  that  the  friend- 
ship of  the  world  is  enmity  with  God  ?  Whosoever  there- 
fore would  be  a  friend  of  the  world  maketh  himself  an 
enemy  of  God."  ^  Whether  this  is  to  be  regarded  as 
savoring  of  asceticism  depends  upon  what  is  understood 
by  the  "world."  As  the  context  suggests,  James  prob- 
ably meant  by  the  term  the  province  of  the  unregen- 
erated  life,  the  sphere  of  intemperate  sensuous  pleasures. 
On  this  supposition  his  thought  would  not  be  unlike 
that  contained  in  the  Johannine  injunction  against  love 
of  the  world.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that  the  Epistle 
of  James  shows  a  high  degree  of  ethical  intensity.  There 
breathes  through  it  a  healthy  scorn  for  a  religion  of  mere 
creed  and  profession. 

IV.  —  The  Teaching  of  the  Apocalypse. 

I.  The  numerous  attempts  which  have  been  made  to 
read  into  the  Apocalypse  the  outlines  of  all  history  since 
the  time  of  its  composition  suggest  that  first  of  all  we 
inquire  how  far  its  prophetical  outlook  reaches,  or  how 
much  it  attempts  to  teach  in  a  detailed  fashion  respect- 

1  James  iv.  4. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        159 

ing  future  events.  An  analysis  of  its  contents  must 
show,  it  strikes  us,  that  it  makes  no  pretence  of  depict- 
ing age-long  developments  of  earthly  history,  but  rather, 
in  harmony  with  its  own  definition  of  its  scope,  deals 
almost  entirely  with  "the  things  which  must  shortly 
come  to  pass."  ^  Its  horizon  is  essentially  the  horizon 
of  the  Roman  empire.  All  that  is  depicted  beyond  that 
is  depicted  in  general  terms  and  within  the  compass  of  a 
few  verses.  The  concluding  statement  respecting  the 
judgment  on  the  beast  ^  is  separated  by  only  the  fraction 
of  a  chapter  from  the  description  of  the  final  judgment.^ 
Now  the  beast  is  identified  in  the  foregoing  characteriza- 
tions, beyond  all  shadow  of  real  ambiguity,  with  the 
dominion  of  pagan  Rome.  It  has  its  seat  upon  seven 
mountains,^  in  Babylon  the  great,^  is  a  world-dominating 
power ,^  and  makes  war  upon  the  saints.''  It  is  not  a 
monster  that  is  to  come  on  the  stage  in  some  future  era. 
Its  beginning  lies  back  of  the  seer's  own  day.  It  is  a 
seven-headed  beast,  and  these  seven  heads  "  are  seven 
kings;  the  five  are  fallen,  the  one  is,  the  other  is  not 
yet  come."^  Such  language  is  obviously  incompatible 
with  the  notion  of  any  reference  to  an  overgrown  eccle- 
siastical power  —  a  thing  not  yet  on  the  field  at  all  in 
the  author's  day.  It  is  plainly  the  Roman  imperium 
that  the  seven-headed  beast  symbolizes.  And  the  other 
evil  mundane  powers  that  are  mentioned  (with  the  ex- 
ception of  Gog  and  Magog)  belong  within  its  sphere. 
The  beast  with  the  two  horns  ^  most  likely  represents 

1  Rev.  i.  I,  xxii.  6.  *  xvii.  9.  "^  xiii.  7. 

2  xix.  20.  ^  xvii.  5.  8  xvii.  10. 
*xx.  11-15.                                6  xiii.  2-5.  'xiii.  11-13. 


l60  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  system  of  pagan  superstition  and  sorcery,  full  of 
enmity  toward  the  followers  of  Christ  and  in  close  alli- 
ance with  the  persecuting  demigods  enthroned  over  the 
empire  ;  ^  or  else,  a  fanatical  and  antichristian  power  from 
out  the  midst  of  Judaism.  The  interpretation  of  the 
ten  kings  symbolized  by  the  ten  horns  ^  is,  indeed,  in 
question.  Some  exegetes  have  supposed  them  to  denote 
heads  of  Roman  provinces;  others  have  seen  in  them 
the  rulers  of  regions  bordering  the  empire.  In  any  case 
—  and  this  is  the  point  of  emphasis  here  —  they  are 
viewed  as  contemporary  with  the  empire  of  pagan  Rome. 
They  are  the  allies  of  the  last  in  the  list  of  the  emperors, 
that  is,  of  the  "  eighth  who  is  of  the  seven."  To  this 
impersonation  of  Roman  sovereignty,  to  this  form  of  the 
beast,  ''they  give  their  power  and  authority." ^  They 
join  with  him  in  the  enterprise  of  establishing  his  supre- 
macy and  are  joint  cause  with  him  of  the  burning  of  the 
city  of  Rome.  Here  ends  the  detailed  prediction  with 
the  sketch  of  this  eighth  who  seems  to  be  regarded  as 
in  some  sense  a  reproduction  of  one  of  the  seven,*  and 
who  with  his  allies  and  worshippers  is  cast  into  perdition. 
As  the  seer,  according  to  his  own  statement,  wrote  in 


1  It  is  to  be  noticed  that  in  another  connection  there  is  added  to  the 
dragon  and  the  beast,  as  the  third  member  of  the  evil  trio,  the  false 
prophet  {yLvx.  13,  xix.  20). 

2  xiii.  I,  xvii.  7,  12. 
8  xvii.  13. 

4  It  has  been  alleged  that  the  expression,  "  of  the  seven,"  indicates 
only  descent,  and  that  the  numeral  €ts  would  have  been  expressed  if  the 
meaning  had  been  "one  of  the  seven."  But  this  contention  is  not 
specially  convincing.  A  precisely  parallel  instance  of  the  omission  of 
els  is  found  in  Acts  xxi.  8. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        i6l 

the  time  of  the  sixth  king,  that  is,  the  sixth  Roman 
emperor,  did  not  expect  the  imperial  line  to  run  beyond 
the  eighth,  and  has  interposed  nothing  between  this 
closing  embodiment  of  Roman  power  and  the  thousand 
years'  reign  of  Christ,  it  is  quite  evident  that  his  forecast 
did  not  touch  the  field  of  modern  history.  If  the  num- 
ber seven  be  taken  literally,  and  not  as  a  symbol  of  the 
complete  succession  of  emperors,  it  will  need  to  be  con- 
cluded that  nearly  the  whole  bulk  of  his  predictions  con- 
templated events  falling  within  the  limits  of  the  first 
century.  In  any  event  his  vision  rested  on  no  details 
of  future  earthly  history  beyond  the  course  of  the  empire 
then  existing.  The  only  mundane  power  which  undeni- 
ably emerges  beyond  the  Roman  is  that  described  by  the 
names  Gog  and  Magog  and  pictured  as  the  ally  of  Satan 
in  his  final  onslaught.^  As  is  usual  in  prophecy,  the 
events  near  at  hand  fill  up  the  greater  part  of  the  field 
of  vision.  The  remote  is  sketched  in  very  general  out- 
lines and  is  closely  associated  with  the  closing  up  of  the 
dispensation. 

2.  The  prominence  of  the  imperial  power  of  Rome  in 
the  revelator's  contemplation  is  indicated  by  the  fact 
that  the  function  of  Satan  is  made  to  consist  very  largely 
in  furnishing  that  power  for  its  ungodly  work.  The 
symbol  of  the  one  is  parallel  to  that  of  the  other. 
Satan  is  the  dragon  with  seven  heads  and  ten  horns.^  He 
gives  to  the  beast  with  seven  heads  and  ten  horns  **  his 
power,  and  his  throne,  and  great  authority."  ^  With  this 
striking  index  of  the  writer's  standpoint  other  graphic 
tokens  are  combined.     Indeed,  as  Ramsay  has  remarked, 

ixx.  7-9.  ^xii.  3.  ^xiii.  2. 


l62  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

"the    shadow  of   the  Roman  empire   broods    over  the 
whole  of  the  Apocalypse."  ^ 

The  abhorrence  of  the  Roman  imperium  which  led  the 
revelator  to  picture  it  as  the  preferred  agent  of  Satan 
was  not  due  merely  to  the  fact  that  it  was  looked  upon 
as  a  centre  of  persecuting  malignity.  He  regarded  it 
also  as  the  centre  of  a  colossal  and  corrupting  idolatry. 
The  earth,  as  he  represents,  was  seduced  into  worship- 
ping the  beast.2  js^^  ^^^  ^ij^g  when  he  wrote,  the  im- 
perial cult  had  not  been  pushed  to  its  full  extreme ;  but 
already  emperor-worship  had  gone  far  enough  to  sug- 
gest that  the  Caesar  was  a  rival  to  any  god  that  men 
might  be  urged  to  respect.  Already  the  custom  of 
deifying  the  dead  emperor  was  in  vogue.  Already  an 
Augustus  and  a  Tiberius  had  been  honored  with  religious 
rites,  and  a  Caligula  had  "instituted  a  temple  and  priests 
with  choicest  victims  in  honor  of  his  own  divinity ."^  To 
the  stanch  Jewish  sentiment  of  the  writer  this  was  of 
course  exceedingly  revolting.  It  is  no  wonder,  when  he 
contemplated  this  power,  at  once  greedy  of  the  incense 
of  the  world  and  drunk  with  the  blood  of  saints,  that  he 
thought  of  it  as  the  foremost  embodiment  of  the  disposi- 
tion and  energy  of  Satan.  Imperial  Rome  at  the  worst 
was,  in  truth,  a  sufficiently  genuine  specimen  of  diabol- 
ism, 

3.  Against  this  colossal  embodiment  of  evil  and  vio- 
lence what  form  does  the  revelator  bring  into  the  field 
of  conflict .?  Above  all  the  form  of  a  lamb.  The  beast 
and  its  allies  make  war  upon  the  Lamb,  and  "  the  Lamb 

1  The  Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia,  p.  93. 
2xiii.  4,  5,  12.  *  Suetonius,  "  Caligula,"  xxii. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       163 

shall  overcome  them."^  It  is  the  peculiarity  of  the 
Apocalypse  that  with  images  of  majesty  and  resistless 
authority,  with  the  throne  and  the  iron  sceptre,  it  com- 
bines this  image  of  gentleness.  Through  all  its  delinea- 
tion of  might  and  wrath  and  judgment  runs  the  thor- 
oughly Christian  sentiment  that  the  supremacy  is  with 
the  spirit  of  gentleness  and  sacrifice,  that  the  Lamb  is 
the  conqueror  of  the  beast.  In  the  greater  part  of  the 
book  the  chosen  title  of  the  Redeemer  is  the  Lamb.  It 
occurs  twenty-nine  times,  whereas  the  term  Jesus  ap- 
pears less  than  a  dozen  times  and  Christ  only  about  a 
half-dozen  times. 

As  respects  the  rank  belonging  to  Christ,  the  Apoca- 
lypse renders  a  somewhat  more  explicit  testimony  than 
the  other  writings  in  the  group  under  consideration.  In 
some  of  its  christological  phrases  and  conceptions  it 
touches  upon  both  Pauline  and  Johannine  representa- 
tions. Especially  does  the  declaration,  "  His  name  is 
called  the  '  Word  of  God',"  ^  remind  of  the  prologue  of 
the  fourth  Gospel.  Moreover  the  total  picture  given  of 
Christ  cannot  be  said  to  fall  below  a  Johannine  level. 
While  He  appears  in  the  form  of  a  son  of  man  in  the 
midst  of  the  golden  candlesticks,  he  bears  features  which 
Jewish  descriptive  art  was  wont  to  attach  to  the  Ancient 
of  Days.3  He  characterizes  Himself  as  "  the  first  and 
the  last  and  the  living  one,"  and  claims  to  hold  the 
keys  of  <* death  and  Hades."*  He  fulfills  the  function, 
ascribed  in  the  Old  Testament  to  Jehovah,  of  searching 
the  reins  and  hearts.^     The  pneumatic  virtue  operative 

ixvii.  14.  8  Compare  i.  14  with  Dan.  vii.  9.  ^u.  23. 

2xix.  13.  M.  17,  18. 


l64  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

in  the  world  is  from  Him  :  "  He  hath  the  seven  spirits 
of  God."i  -phe  heavenly  potentates  fall  down  before 
Him  and  hail  Him  as  "worthy  to  receive  power  and 
riches  and  wisdom  and  might  and  honor  and  glory."  ^  He 
is  made  joint  object  of  homage  with  Him  that  sitteth 
upon  the  throne  in  the  ascription  which  is  rendered  by 
the  whole  creation.^  He  is  described  as  "  Lord  of  lords 
and  King  of  kings."*  With  the  Lord  God  He  consti- 
tutes the  temple  of  heaven,  and  He  is  the  lamp  thereof.^ 
The  river  of  life  issues  from  the  throne  of  which  He  is 
joint  occupant  with  the  Father.^  Such  ascriptions  in  a 
book  which  shows  a  clear  sense  of  the  distinction  between 
the  divine  and  the  creaturely  by  reprobating  obeisance  to 
angels  ^  certainly  imply  that  in  the  thought  of  the  writer 
Christ  stood  above  the  creaturely  sphere.  If  a  few  sen- 
tences seem  to  associate  Him  with  that  sphere,^  it  is 
scarcely  surprising  in  consideration  of  the  truth  that  He 
was  accounted  the  offspring  of  David,^  and  brother  of 
men,io  as  well  as  the  Son  of  God.^i 

The  references  of  the  Apocalypse  to  the  Holy  Spirit 
are  not  sufficiently  specific  to  afford  much  ground  for 
dogmatic  inference.  They  emphasize  a  single  function, 
namely  that  of  inspiration  or  revelation.  The  Spirit  is 
not  mentioned  as  a  source  of  regeneration  or  sanctifica- 
tion,  unless  it  be  in  a  general  way  in  the  greeting  to  the 
seven  churches.^    He  appears  essentially  as  the  author 

liii.  I,  V.  6.  8v.  13,  14,  vii.  10.  ^xxi.  22,  23. 

2v.  12.  *xvii.  14,  xix.  16.  ^xxii.  i. 

■^xix.  10. 

8i.  6,  iii.  12.     Over  against  the  apparent  inclusion  in  the  created 
sphere  in  iii.  14  may  be  cited  the  apparent  exclusion  in  v.  13. 
»xxii.  16.  lOxu.  17.  "ii.  18.  121.4. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        165 

or  bearer  of  a  message.^  In  one  of  the  forms  of  descrip- 
tion used  He  is  placed  in  a  relation  of  very  intimate 
union  with  the  Son.  The  Son  is  said  to  have  the  seven 
spirits  of  God  2  —  another  name  probably  for  the  Holy 
Spirit  viewed  as  inclusive  of  the  complete  circle  of  pneu- 
matic powers  and  able  to  penetrate  to  all  parts  of  the 
world  with  His  glance.^ 

4.  In  pronounced  contrast  with  the  greater  part  of  the 
Book  of  Acts  and  with  the  Epistle  of  James,  the  Apoca- 
lypse distinctly  emphasizes  the  fulfillment  of  Christ's 
redemptive  work  in  and  through  His  death.  The  first 
doxology  to  Christ  which  it  records  pays  tribute  to  Him 
as  the  one  who  "  loosed  us  from  our  sins  by  His  blood."* 
Again  He  is  celebrated  as  the  Lamb  that  was  slain  and 
that  purchased  unto  God  with  His  blood  every  tribe  and 
tongue  and  people  and  nation.^  Once  more,  the  innumer- 
able host  of  those  who  celebrate  their  victory  in  heaven 
are  represented  as  owing  their  perfect  cleansing  to  Him. 
They  have  washed  their  robes  and  made  them  white  in 
the  Llood  of  the  Lamb.^  These  are  broad  and  unequivo- 
cal statements  of  the  fact  that  human  redemption  depends 
upon  the  death  of  Christ.  The  manner  or  ground  of  this 
dependence,  on  the  other  hand,  they  do  not  make  mani- 
fest.    The  most  that  can  be  said  is,  that  the  great  stress 

1  i.  10,  ii.  7,  17,  29,  iii.  6,  13,  22,  iv.  2,  xiv.  13,  xvii.  3,  xxi.  10,  xxii.  17. 

2iii.  I,  V.  6. 

^Compare  Zech.  iv.  10.  A  different  interpretation  of  the  seven  spirits 
makes  them  an  exalted  rank  of  angels.  The  difficulty  with  this  inter- 
pretation is  the  association  of  them  with  God  and  Christ  as  a  source  of 
grace  and  peace.  Such  association  is  accordant  neither  with  the  tenor 
of  the  Apocalypse  nor  with  that  of  any  other  New  Testament  book. 

*i.  5.  ^v.  9.  «vii.9-i4. 


l66  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

put  upon  the  slain  Lamb,  taken  in  connection  with  the 
trend  of  Old  and  New  Testament  thinking  on  the  sub- 
ject of  sacrifice,  renders  it  probable  that  the  apocalyptic 
writer  attached  an  objective  value  to  Christ's  death,  con- 
sidered it  to  be,  from  the  divine  point  of  view,  in  some 
sort  a  condition  of  a  general  economy  of  grace  or  a 
fundamental  factor  in  such  an  economy. 

The  pictorial  character  of  the  book  dictated  that  it 
should  represent  religion  more  largely  on  its  objective 
side  than  in  its  more  interior  characteristics.  The  extent 
moreover  to  which  it  deals  with  the  theme  of  judgment 
gave  a  natural  occasion  to  speak  often  of  the  works  of 
men  as  an  index  of  their  deserts  and  prospects.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  works  are  mentioned  much  more  fre- 
quently than  faith,  and  Christ  is  presented  rather  in  His 
exterior  relations  than  as  a  sacred  power  and  presence 
in  the  inner  life.  One  statement  indeed  brings  out  the 
thought  of  intimate  companionship  with  Christ  in  the 
present.  In  the  message  to  the  Church  in  Laodicea  He 
is  represented  as  saying,  "Behold  I  stand  at  the  door 
and  knock;  if  any  man  hear  my  voice  and  open  the 
door,  I  will  come  in  to  him,  and  will  sup  with  him,  and 
he  with  me."  ^  This  is  beautifully  significant  of  close 
companionship ;  but  generally  speaking  the  Apocalypse 
stands  in  contrast  with  the  Pauline  and  Johannine  writ- 
ings with  their  warm  interest  in  the  thought  of  an  interior 
life-communion  in  the  present  between  Christ  and  His 
disciples. 

The  lofty  position  assigned  to  Christ  and  the  profound 
emphasis  which  is  placed  upon  His  blood  as  a  means  of 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        167 

cleansing  imply  that  a  normal  religious  faith  reposes  very 
largely  upon  Him.  It  is  noticeable,  however,  that  in 
very  rare  instances  is  there  any  direct  mention  of  faith 
in  Christ,^  and  that  these  instances  are  paralleled  by 
others  in  which  faith  seems  to  be  used  in  a  broad  way 
as  equivalent  to  steadfast  fidelity.^  Concerning  faith  as 
distinctively  the  principle  of  justification  before  God 
there  is  no  discourse  whatever.  With  an  evangelical 
valuation  of  Christ's  sacrifice  there  is  conjoined  a  some- 
what legal  representation  of  Christian  piety.  One  state- 
ment, if  taken  literally,  reads  like  a  tribute  to  the  ascetic 
standpoint;  but  there  are  reasons  for  construing  the 
statement  in  a  different  sense.^ 

5.  The  Apocalypse  gives  a  glowing  picture  of  the  per- 
fected community  of  Christ,  but  says  very  little  respect- 
ing the  arrangements  of  the  Church  upon  earth.  It 
speaks  rather  of  churches  than  of  the  Church.  No 
nearer  description  of  the  church  officiary  is  given  than 
that  contained  in  a  bare  mention  of  apostles  and  prophets. 
Some  have  indeed  supposed  that  the  angels  of  the  Asi- 
atic churches  denote  bishops.  But  there  is  no  proper 
occasion  for  such  a  supposition.     It  belongs  to  the  pic- 

lii.  13,  xiv.  12.  ^ii.  19,  xiii.  10. 

3  Rev.  xiv.  1-5.  The  exegesis  which  finds  here  a  commendation  of 
celibacy  proper  is  thus  criticised  by  Titius  (Die  vulgare  Anschauung 
von  der  Seligkeit  im  Urchristenthum,  p.  102):  "At  once  the  compari- 
son with  vii.  4£f.  (also  with  xx.  12  ff.)  makes  it  improbable  that  we  have 
to  do  here  with  only  a  troop  of  ascetics  and  not  with  the  whole  militant 
host  of  Christ.  .  .  .  The  defilement  with  women  cannot  be  meant  sim- 
ply of  marriage,  since  that  would  directly  collide  with  the  universally 
prevalent  Christian  view ;  it  must  refer  rather  to  whoredom.  This  in 
fact  is  an  oft-employed  image  for  God-forgetting  worldliness  (Apoc. 
xvii.  1-5,  etc.;  James  iv.  4 ;  Hermas,  Simil.  IX.  xiii.  8  f.)."  Compare 
Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  548. 


l68  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

torial  character  of  the  book  to  bring  forward  angels  at 
every  turn.  In  all  probability  the  angels  of  the  churches 
stand  for  ideal  representatives,  and  the  command  to  de- 
liver a  message  to  the  angels  of  the  churches  is  to  be 
considered  as  only  a  more  picturesque  way  of  directing 
that  a  message  be  carried  to  the  churches.  This  view 
is  distinctly  favored  by  the  fact  that  the  message  in  each 
instance  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  standing  or  history 
of  an  individual  official,  but  is  wholly  occupied  with  pic- 
turing the  condition  and  needs  of  a  Christian  community .^ 
That  the  writer's  standpoint  was  not  sacerdotal  is  indi- 
cated by  his  characterization  of  Christians  generally  as 
priests.2  It  is  to  be  noticed  further  that  no  sacrament 
is  mentioned,  and  that  in  the  line  of  sacrificial  service 
only  the  offering  of  incense  is  specified,  which  incense 
in  one  instance  is  identified  with  the  prayers  of  the 
saints,^  and  in  another  instance  is  said  to  be  mingled 
with  the  prayers.*  The  highest  honor  among  glorified 
saints  is  ascribed  to  the  twelve  apostles,  in  that  their 
names  are  said  to  be  written  upon  the  foundations  of  the 
wall  of  the  New  Jerusalem.^  No  reference  to  the  Virgin 
Mary  occurs.  The  woman  pictured  as  arrayed  with  the 
sun,  and  the  moon  under  her  feet,  and  upon  her  head  a 
crown  of  twelve  stars,  denotes  the  Jewish  theocracy  (or 
the  Church  as  based  in  the  Jewish  theocracy),  from 
which  the  Messiah  springs,  and  the  rest  of  her  seed 
which  is  subject,  with  the  Messiah,  to  the  persecution  of 
the  dragon  denotes  the  true  children  of  the  Messianic 

1  Compare   Holtzmann,  Hand-Commentar,  IV.  320;  Ramsay,  The 
Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia,  pp.  69-72. 

i.  6,  V.  10.  Sy.  8.  ■♦viu.  3,  4.  ^xxi.  14. 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL        169 

community  who  keep  the  commandments  of  God  and 
hold  the  testimony  of  Jesus.^  This  mention  of  the  seed 
of  the  woman  is  a  clear  enough  intimation  that  it  was 
not  the  Virgin  Mary  that  the  writer  was  depicting. 

6.  In  the  eschatology  of  the  Apocalypse  the  most 
distinctive  feature  is  doubtless  the  doctrine  of  the  mil- 
lennial reign  of  Christ  with  the  martyred  saints. ^  No- 
where else  in  the  New  Testament  is  this  subject  intro- 
duced. As  near  an  approach  to  it  as  any  is  contained 
in  Paul's  declaration  that  Christ  must  reign  till  He  hath 
put  all  His  enemies  under  His  feet.^  But  there  is  no 
distinct  assertion  here  that  the  fruits  of  Christ's  triumph 
are  to  be  seen  for  a  prolonged  era  upon  the  earth.  The 
statement  of  Paul,  therefore,  differs  from  the  apocalyptic 
representation  of  the  millennial  kingdom.  The  evident 
sense  of  the  latter  is  that  the  cause  of  Christ,  issuing 
from  scenes  of  mortal  struggle,  is  to  enjoy  an  era  of 
relative  ascendency  and  peaceful  triumph  in  the  earth ; 
that  a  favored  company  of  Christ's  servants  is  to  antici- 
pate the  general  resurrection ;  and  that  this  company  is 
to  share  in  some  special  way  in  the  glory  and  dominion 
of  their  Lord  during  the  interval  preceding  the  general 
resurrection  and  judgment.  That  the  millennial  reign 
is  to  be  inaugurated  by  the  visible  coming  of  Christ  and 
is  to  proceed  as  a  visible  administration  of  Christ  and 
the  risen  saints  is  not  said.  It  is  a  fair  question  whether 
it  was  thought  by  the  revelator.  Those,  therefore,  who 
would  make  a  positive  tenet  of  the  idea  of  a  future 
visible  reign  of  Christ  upon  earth  must  build  upon  a 
very  scanty  foundation.     They  have  not  so  much  of  a 

^xii.  17.  2 XX.  4-6.  «  I  Cor.  xv.  25. 


I/O  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

foundation  as  one  definite  expression  in  a  single  passage 
of  a  single  biblical  writer,  but  only  what  may  possibly 
have  been  the  thought  of  the  revelator  in  penning  a 
single  passage. 

Aside  from  the  millennial  reign  the  most  noticeable 
feature,  perhaps,  in  the  eschatology  of  the  Apocalypse 
is  the  fact  that  the  earth  comes  to  view  beyond  the 
judgment  scene.  Heaven  does  not  absorb  the  whole 
outlook.  Together  with  the  new  heaven  a  new  earth 
appears.  The  new  Jerusalem,  too,  stands  not  apart  in  a 
heavenly  enclosure.  It  comes  down  out  of  heaven  from 
God.  In  all  this  representation  there  was  probably  little 
design  to  make  much  of  locality.  The  thought  is  that 
throughout  the  regenerated  universe  a  scene  of  beauty 
is  to  be  spread  and  the  glory  of  God  made  signally  mani- 
fest. The  heavenly  model  is  to  be  perfectly  reflected 
even  in  the  lower  province. 

7.  In  estimating  the  Apocalypse  the  thought  lies  near 
at  hand  that  its  value  is  not  to  be  measured  by  the 
extent  of  its  dogmatic  content.  There  is  a  healthful 
tonic  in  its  religious  intensity.  It  supplies  a  great  store 
of  riches  to  the  religious  imagination.  It  dignifies  the 
Christian  warfare  as  part  of  a  great  drama  that  is  being 
led  on  to  a  transcendently  glorious  issue.  Well  has  it 
been  called  the  epic  of  Christian  hope.  Many  of  its 
outlooks  have  perennial  charm,  and  many  of  its  words 
descend  generation  after  generation  like  strains  of  celes- 
tial music  upon  the  troubled  hearts  of  men.  Let  it  be 
granted  that  some  of  its  delineations  were  better  suited 
to  win  appreciation  in  that  age  of  apocalyptic  production 
than  in  the  present ;  let  it  be  granted  also  that  it  has 


TEACHING  AKIN  TO  THE  SYNOPTICAL       l/l 

some  stones  of  stumbling  for  the  most  clear-sighted  and 
unbiased  exegete ;  it  is  still  a  book  which,  through  the 
wealth  of  its  content,  fulfills  the  high  function  of  being 
profitable  unto  righteousness. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY 

I. — The  Several  Groups  of  Pauline  Epistles. 

I.  The  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  stand  by 
themselves,  not  only  as  being  probably  the  earliest  in 
the  order  of  composition,  but  also  as  possessing  in  com- 
mon a  character  which  distinguishes  them  from  the  other 
epistles  of  the  apostle.  This  character  may  be  defined 
negatively  as  a  relative  lack  of  insistence  upon  doctrinal 
features  which  are  powerfully  inculcated  in  the  central 
group  of  epistles,  lln  neither  epistle  do  we  discover  a 
line  which  speaks  of  justification  by  faith,  or  shows  up 
the  futility  of  the  legal  method  of  salvation,  or  paints  in 
strong  colors  the  contrast  between  the  natural  and  the 
spiritual  man. "';  One  line  only  contains  a  reference  to  the 
death  of  Christ.  Indirectly  some  of  these  points  may 
be  touched  upon  in  the  stress  which  is  placed  upon  the 
"  grace  of  Christ  "  and  the  "  work  of  faith."  It  is  to  be 
conceded  also  that  a  characteristic  Pauline  conception 
comes  to  expression  in  the  view  which  is  taken  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  as  being  an  abiding  resident  and  principle 
of  sanctification  in  believing  souls,  as  well  as  a  source  of 
extraordinary  gifts.  Still  there  is  a  noticeable  lack  of 
what  any  one  familiar  with  the  sum  total  of  Paul's  writ- 
ings would  be  disposed  to  describe  as  distinctive  features 
172 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  173 

of  his  teaching.  ,  Positively  considered,  the  special  char- 
acter of  the  Thessalonian  Epistles  appears  in  the  approxi- 
mation of  their  line  of  thought  to  the  primitive  apostolic 
type,  as  this  is  reflected  in  the  early  chapters  of  the  Book 
of  Acts.  This  approximation  may  be  noticed  in  the 
prominence  which  is  given  to  the  anticipation  of  Christ's 
return,  and  in  a  close  association  of  the  office  of  Christ 
with  the  great  events  which  belong  at  the  end  of  the 
dispensation,  as  opposed  to  an  explicit  emphasis  upon 
His  present  indwelling. )  The  thought  of  a  mystical  union 
with  Christ,  which  is  seen  elsewhere  to  have  commanded 
the  intense  enthusiasm  of  the  apostle,  recedes  in  these 
writings  behind  the  objective  phases  of  the  Redeemer's 
work,  as  these  were  commonly  apprehended  in  the  early 
days  of  Christianity. 

In  explaining  the  relatively  simple  and  primitive  form 
of  teaching  which  we  find  here,  it  is  not  forbidden  to 
take  some  account  of  the  consideration  that  Paul  may 
not  have  obtained  his  entire  theological  outfit  all  at 
once.  But  we  are  advised  against  making  too  much  of 
the  notion  that  he  was  himself  at  an  elementary  stage  in 
his  thinking  at  the  time  he  wrote  to  the  church  at  Thes- 
salonica,  when  we  consider  the  moderate  interval  between 
these  communications  and  one  which  represents  such  a 
radical  and  advanced  type  of  Paulinism  as  does  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians.  It  is  altogether  probable  that 
in  the  score  of  years  which  had  elapsed  since  his  con- 
version he  had  pretty  well  thought  through  his  system. 
But  in  dealing  with  a  newly  founded  community  of  be- 
lievers, within  which  theological  speculation  and  con- 
troversy had  not  yet  been  fairly  started,  there  was  no 


174  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

need  of  disquisition  of  the  more  subtle  kind.  {  Accom- 
modation to  those  addressed  is,  therefore,  the  best  part 
of  the  explanation  of  the  special  cast  of  the  Thessalonian 
Epistles.  We  may  suppose  that,  in  a  like  use  of  mission- 
ary discretion,  the  apostle  often  gave  forth  a  message  as 
little  distinguished  by  subtlety  and  theological  elabora- 
tion. His  profounder  epistles,  written  to  meet  great 
theological  issues,  are  not  to  be  taken  as  samples  of  his 
uniform  method  as  a  religious  teacher. 

Opposition  to  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  First 
Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  may  be  said  to  have  been 
reduced  so  nearly  to  the  vanishing  point  as  no  longer  to 
deserve  consideration.  In  respect  of  the  Second  Epistle 
more  doubt  is  entertained,  though  the  tendency  of  criti- 
cism is  clearly  toward  a  favorable  judgment.  One  of 
the  main  grounds  for  suspicion  is  the  passage  in  the 
second  chapter  relative  to  antichrist  or  the  man  of  sin. 
This,  it  is  alleged,  agrees  ill  with  the  picture  of  the 
imminence  of  Christ's  coming  in  the  former  epistle, 
since  it  projects  that  coming  into  the  distance,  placing 
it  beyond  a  culminating  manifestation  of  ungodliness. 
It  is  also  alleged  that  the  apocalyptic  passage  in  ques- 
tion shows  dependence  upon  the  Johannine  Apocalypse. 
Neither  objection,  however,  has  any  great  weight.  The 
second  epistle  corrects  indeed  an  over-feverish  expecta- 
tion respecting  the  speedy  coming  of  Christ,  but  it  does 
not  dissuade  the  Thessalonians  from  the  belief  that  it  is 
relatively  near  at  hand,  so  as  possibly  to  fall  within  the 
existing  generation ;  and  the  first  epistle  does  not  deny 
that  important  historical  developments  are  to  precede 
the  advent.     That  great  event,  it  is  true,  is  depicted  as 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  175 

likely  to  overtake  the  unheeding  as  a  thief  in  the  night ; 
but  it  is  not  stated  that  "the  sons  of  the  day"  are  to  be 
destitute  of  all  faculty  to  detect  signs  of  the  approaching 
crisis.^  As  regards  the  assumption  of  dependence  upon 
the  Johannine  Apocalypse,  it  may  be  replied,  that  it  is 
quite  gratuitous  to  suppose  that  the  writer  drew  from 
that  source.  If  we  are  to  conclude,  as  exegetes  very 
commonly  assume,  that  by  the  "  one  that  restraineth " 
the  Roman  government  is  to  be  understood,  then  we 
have  in  the  Thessalonian  passage  a  prominent  element 
to  which  nothing  in  the  Johannine  Apocalypse  properly 
corresponds.  As  respects  the  delineation  as  a  whole,  we 
need  not  suppose  any  such  dearth  of  sources  that  Paul 
could  not  have  written  it  in  advance  of  the  composition 
of  the  seer  of  Patmos.  Hints  in  the  eschatological  dis- 
courses of  Christ,  Paul's  own  reflection,  and  the  broad 
stream  of  apocalyptic  representations  in  preceding  and 
comtemporary  Judaism  may  reasonably  be  regarded  as 
affording  sufficient  materials  for  the  picture  of  antichrist 
that  is  given.  In  no  other  connection,  it  is  true,  has 
Paul  furnished  us  an  equivalent  picture ;  but,  then,  it  is 
also  true  that  we  are  not  informed  that  he  had  a  like 
occasion  again  to  curb  a  too  exciting  expectation  of  the 
second  advent. 

Among  remaining  objections  the  reference  to  a  spuri- 
ous epistle  2  and  the  marked  literary  dependence  upon 
First  Thessalonians  receive  the  most  emphasis.  As  to 
the  former,  it  must  be  granted  that  we  should  not  natu- 
rally expect  the  appearance  of  a  spurious  epistle  at  so 
early  a  date ;  but  it  is  to  be  observed  that  there  is  no 

1 1  Thess.  V.  1-5.  2  2  Thess.  ii.  2,  iii.  17. 


176  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

decisive  evidence  of  the  existence  of  such  an  epistle. 
The  facts  are  simply  these :  Paul  found  that  the  enthu- 
siasts were  appealing  to  a  letter  of  his  in  behalf  of  their 
mistaken  notions.  He  was  unwilling  to  admit  that  a 
proper  basis  for  these  notions  could  be  found  in  anything 
which  he  had  written ;  and  so  he  cast  up  the  question 
whether  a  false  epistle  had  not  found  its  way  to  Thessa- 
lonica.  His  words  embody  only  a  surmise  of  a  possible 
fact.  As  respects  literary  dependence,  it  is  doubtless 
true  that  Second  Thessalonians  reproduces  to  a  marked 
degree  the  phraseology  of  First  Thessalonians.^  But  it 
is  no  unheard-of  thing  for  an  author,  with  or  without  de- 
sign, to  reproduce  from  a  previous  writing.  Moreover, 
it  is  scarcely  more  of  an  enigma  that  Paul  should  in  a 
measure  repeat  himself  than  that  a  forger  should  be  at 
pains  to  imitate  closely  the  language  of  Paul  through  the 
compass  of  several  chapters,  just  for  the  sake  of  insert- 
ing a  brief  item  of  apocalyptic  representation. 

It  may  be  noticed  that  a  couple  of  time  marks,  as 
making  for  the  early  origin  of  the  epistle,  are  favorable 
to  the  supposition  of  Pauline  authorship.  On  the  one 
hand,  the  reference  to  the  temple  (ii.  4) — presumably 
to  that  in  Jerusalem  —  points  to  a  date  prior  to  the  year 
70.  On  the  other  hand,  the  reference  to  "one  that  re- 
restraineth  "  (ii.  6,  7),  in  so  far  as  there  are  grounds  for 
applying  this  phrase  to  the  Roman  government,  points 
to  a  time  anterior  to  the  year  64 ;  since,  after  the  atroci- 

1  Wrede  makes  this  the  foremost  objection  to  the  Pauline  authorship 
of  the  epistle.  He  concedes  that  the  content  of  the  apocalyptic  pas- 
sage in  the  second  chapter  is  not  an  insuperable  obstacle  to  attributing 
the  epistle  to  the  apostle.  (Die  Echtheit  des  zweiten  Thessalonicher- 
briefs.) 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  177 

ties  perpetrated  under  the  hand  of  Nero,  there  would  be 
very  Httle  incentive  in  a  Christian  mind  to  portray  the 
Roman  government  as  a  safeguard  against  fanatical  vio- 
lence. 

2.  In  the  second  group  of  epistles  we  have  a  much 
fuller  expression  of  the  intellectual  energy,  spiritual  afflu- 
ence, and  matured  theological  reflection  of  Paul  than  in 
the  one  just  characterized.  The  terms  which  Pfleiderer 
applies  to  one  of  them,  in  describing  it  as  a  *'  glorious 
monument  of  a  great  religious  genius,"  may  with  equal 
right  be  applied  to  each  one  of  them.  Here  belong  the 
epistles  to  the  Galatians,  the  Corinthians,  and  the  Ro- 
mans. These  writings  undoubtedly  contain  the  concep- 
tions which  filled  and  fired  the  soul  of  Paul  at  the  zenith 
of  his  apostolic  ministry.  There  is  no  question  as  to 
their  genuineness,  except  on  the  part  of  a  kind  of  mad- 
house criticism,  such  as  might  disport  itself  in  a  pre- 
tended proof  that  Napoleon  Bonaparte  never  had  any 
place  in  European  history.  An  inquiry  can  indeed  be 
raised  as  to  whether  the  list  of  salutations  in  the  six- 
teenth chapter  of  Romans  and  also  some  lesser  portions 
of  the  same  chapter  belong  with  this  particular  writing. 
There  is  room  likewise  for  a  query  as  to  whether  the  last 
four  chapters  of  Second  Corinthians  did  not  form  origi- 
nally a  distinct  communication  to  the  Corinthian  congre- 
gation. But  these  are  questions  of  place  and  time,  and 
involve  no  objection  of  any  consequence  to  Pauline  au- 
thorship. Biblical  theology  does  not  need  to  discuss  them.^ 

1  Not  a  few  scholars  are  of  opinion  that  Ephesus  is  to  be  accounted 
a  much  more  probable  destination  than  Rome  for  such  a  list  of  saluta- 
tions as  is  given  in  xvi.  1-16.     On  the  other  hand,  it  is  urged  that  the 


I/S  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Among  these  epistles  that  to  the  Romans  has  the 
least  appearance  of  having  been  dictated  by  special  local 
conditions.  Very  likely  there  was  somewhat  in  the  situ- 
ation of  the  Christian  community  at  Rome  which  made 
it  appropriate  for  Paul  to  address  to  them  the  special  line 
of  thought  to  which  he  had  recourse.  Still  there  is 
some  reason  for  the  conjecture  that  the  apostle,  after  a 
season  of  spirited  controversy,  wished  to  put  on  record  a 
connected  statement  of  the  truths  which  he  counted  it 
his  vocation  to  champion,  and  was  aware  that  in  address- 
ing the  congregation  at  the  great  capital  he  was  likely  to 
give  his  apostolic  message  to  the  Church  at  large.)  In 
its  contents  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  repeats  the  cardi- 
nal antitheses  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  namely 
those  between  law  method  and  gospel  method,  between 
flesh  and  spirit.  It  elucidates,  however,  the  antitheses 
more  at  length,  branches  out  into  related  themes,  and 
sketches  in  fuller  outline(a  theory  of  history  and  a  philos- 
ophy of  salvation. :  The  tone  of  the  later  writing,  though 
very  spirited,  is  less  polemical  than  that  of  the  earlier ; 
at  least,  the  former  gives  more  indication  of  a  disposition 
to  qualify  the  radical  disparagement  of  Judaism  which 

proportion  of  the  names  which  are  Roman  in  form,  or  which  occur  in 
sepulchral  inscriptions  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  great  capital,  makes 
for  the  conclusion  that  this  section  may  properly  be  reckoned  a  part  of 
the  original  epistle  to  the  church  of  Rome. 

Recent  criticism  has  exhibited  a  tendency  to  rate  the  last  four  chap- 
ters of  Second  Corinthians  as  an  independent  epistle.  However,  in  the 
absence  of  adequate  means  of  decision,  the  modest  suggestion  of  Jiili- 
cher  is  quite  in  place.  "  There  remains  for  us,"  he  says,  "  matter  for 
surprise  in  the  change  of  tone  and  bearing,  but  we  have  a  much  more 
imperfect  knowledge  of  the  situation  of  the  writer  than  did  the  first  rea. 
ders  by  whom  alone  Paul  wished  to  be  understood."     (Einleitung,  p.  78.) 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  179 

the  Pauline  theory  might  be  thought  to  imply.  Through 
its  varied  contents  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  illustrates, 
to  a  special  degree,  the  many-sided  ability  of  Paul.^  In 
the  Corinthian  Epistles  we  have  glimpses  of  the  dog- 
matic postulates  contained  in  Romans  and  Galatians. 
But  they  are  made  to  share  the  field  of  vision  with  a 
great  variety  of  practical  questions,  such  as  the  adminis- 
tration of  a  restless,  inquisitive  Greek  society,  under  the 
pressure  of  a  sensuous  civilization,  naturally  had  to  con- 
front. More  than  any  other  of  his  writings  they  give 
us  a  full  length  picture  of  Paul  as  man  and  administrator. 
At  the  same  time  their  theological  contribution  is  impor- 
tant. No  where  else  has  the  apostle  given  anything  like 
so  full  an  expression  of  his  thought  on  the  subjects  of 
the  Lord's  supper  and  the  resurrection. 

3.  A  distinct  group  among  the  Pauline  writings  is 
constituted  by  the  series  of  prison  epistles,  or  those  ad- 
dressed to  the  Philippians,  to  Philemon,  to  the  Colossians, 
and  to  a  circle  of  Asiatic  churches.  This  last  came  to 
be  styled  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians.  But  historical 
evidence  favors  the  conclusion  that  Ephesus  was  not 
mentioned  in  the  original  letter,  and  its  contents  are  de- 
cidedly adverse  to  the  supposition  that  it  was  specially 
meant  for  a  congregation  in  which  the  apostle  had  la- 
bored for  a  long  interval.  Recent  scholarship  to  a  very 
large  extent  regards  it  as  a  circular  letter,  designed  for  a 
list  of  churches  some  of  which  at  least  Paul  had  not 
visited  in  person. 

1 "  Here  the  entire  Paul,"  says  Jiilicher,  "  presents  himself  to  our  con- 
templation :  the  rabbinical  scholastic,  the  inspired  poet,  the  sober  far- 
sighted  pastor  of  souls,  and  the  keen  thinker,  who  with  unsparing  reso- 
lution carries  out  the  lines  which  make  all  to  proceed  from  God  and  to 
end  in  Him."     (Einleitung,  p.  92.) 


l80  NEW  STATEMENT  THEOLOGY 

In  this  group  of  epistles  there  are  indications  that  the 
mind  of  the  writer  was  still  tenacious  of  the  points  of 
view  which  had  been  championed  in  Galatians  and 
Romans.  But  these  are  not  thrust  to  the  front  as  they 
were  in  the  earlier  epistles.  The  author  proceeds  as 
though  the  crisis  of  the  battle  against  Judaic  legality 
and  exclusiveness  had  passed,  and  there  was  a  good 
prospect  for  the  cause  of  Christian  freedom  and  univer- 
salism.  He  contents  himself  therefore  with  brief  state- 
ments or  intimations  of  the  principles  for  which  he  had 
contended  in  the  controversy  with  the  Judaizers,  and 
gives  room,  if  not  to  strictly  new  points  of  view,  at  least 
to  a  fuller  consideration  of  special  features  of  his  faith. 
This  is  true  in  particular  of  the  teaching  respecting 
Christ  and  the  Church  contained  in  Colossians  and 
Ephesians.  The  substance  of  this  teaching,  it  is  not  to 
be  denied,  had  already  been  brought  to  view,  since  in 
the  preceding  group  of  epistles  large  views  are  broached 
respecting  the  headship  of  Christ  and  respecting  the 
significance  of  redemption  for  the  creature  universe  in 
general.^  But  it  is  characteristic  of  these  prison  epistles 
that  they  exhibit  a  special  interest  in  asserting  the  uni- 
versal lordship  and  unifying  function  of  Christ,  and  that 
they  make  more  distinct  account  of  the  Church  as  one 
great  unity  than  appears  in  any  previous  writing  of  the 
apostle.  We  speak  here  in  particular  of  Colossians  and 
Ephesians,  since  Philippians  is  a  confidential  and  affec- 
tionate communication  to  a  beloved  congregation,  and 
shows  only  in  minor  degree  a  dogmatic  purpose. 

On  the  question  of  the  authorship  of  these  epistles  a 

1 1  Cor.  viii.  6;  Rom.  viii.  19-22. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  l8l 

relative  unanimity  has  been  reached  in  favor  of  the  com- 
position of  Philippians  by  Paul.  A  very  considerable 
consensus  has  also  been  established  for  the  Pauline 
authorship  of  Colossians.  Ephesians  meets  a  somewhat 
larger  current  of  doubt ;  but  is  favored  nevertheless  with 
a  good  list  of  scholarly  defenders  of  its  Pauline  origin. 
A  principal  ground  of  challenge,  as  brought  forward 
against  both  Colossians  and  Ephesians,  is  the  advance 
in  theological  construction  shown  in  these  epistles.  In 
reply,  three  facts  are  properly  noticed.  The  advance, 
as  was  indicated  above,  was  no  leap  to  a  new  position 
discordant  with  that  previously  advocated;  it  consisted 
only  in  a  more  emphatic  putting  of  points  of  view  already 
broached.^  Again,  since  writing  the  last  in  the  foregoing 
group  of  Epistles,  Paul  had  passed  years  in  imprisonment, 
and  it  is  quite  conceivable  that  in  his  relative  retirement 

^  This  is  very  clearly  illustrated,  as  respects  Ephesians,  in  the  follow- 
ing: "  The  exalted  christology  might  seem  incredible  at  so  early  a  period 
but  for  the  simple  fact  that  in  every  essential  feature  it  is  corroborated 
in  undeniably  genuine  passages.  Disregarding  the  parallels  in  Colos- 
sians, as  disputed,  we  find  the  same  conception  of  Christ  as  preexistent 
in  2  Cor.  viii.  9,  Phil.  ii.  5-1 1;  as  the  image  of  God,  archetype  of 
redeemed  humanity,  in  Rom.  viii.  29,  2  Cor.  iii.  18,  Phil.  iii.  21 ;  as  begin- 
ning and  end  of  creation  in  association  with  God  in  i  Cor.  viii.  6,  xv. 
22-28;  as  lord  of  all  created  being  in  heaven  and  earth  and  under  the 
earth,  triumphant  over  angelic  and  demonic  powers  in  Phil.  ii.  9-1 1, 
I  Cor.  XV.  24  ff . ;  as  agent  of  a  cosmic  redemption  in  Rom.  viii.  19-22. 
And  this  is  but  the  negative  half  of  the  argument;  for  in  i  Cor.  i.  24* 
30,  ii.  6-10,  16  we  have  hints  that  Paul  also  has  a  philosophy  wherewith 
he  could  put  to  shame  the  speculations  of  the  Corinthians,  had  he 
deemed  them  prepared  for  it,  —  a  philosophy  which  was  concerned  with 
Christ  as  the  power  of  God  and  the  wisdom  of  God.  It  consisted  of  a 
revelation  of  the  *  hidden  mystery  of  God  which  he  preordained  before 
the  worlds  unto  our  glory'  (i  Cor.  ii.  7;  cf.  Rom.  xvi.  25-27;  Eph.  L 


l82  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

from  active  work  he  had  matured  theological  construction 
in  one  direction  or  another.  Finally,  it  is  not  improba- 
ble that  Paul  had  a  special  occasion  for  the  amplification 
and  strong  putting  of  the  distinctive  themes  of  these 
epistles.  As  many  commentators  have  observed,^  they 
seem  to  contemplate  an  incipient  Judaic  type  of  Gnosti- 
cism, a  scheme  in  which  ceremonial  and  ascetic  peculiar- 
ities were  combined  with  an  exaggerated  view  of  the 
mediation  of  angels.  In  combatting  this  form  of  error 
the  apostle  naturally  emphasized  strongly  the  unique 
headship  of  Christ  and  the  universality  and  complete- 
ness of  his  reconciling  office ;  and  from  this  standpoint 
he  could  not  well  do  otherwise  than  give  a  certain 
emphasis  to  the  Church  as  a  great  spiritual  unity  af- 
fording an  exemplification  of  the  unifying  work  of 
Christ. 

The  objection  that  phrases  of  second  century  Gnosti- 
cism, such  as  "  pleroma,"  occur,  is  by  no  means  formi- 
dable. This  term  was  not  unknown  to  Paul's  earlier 
vocabulary,  and  he  was  sufficiently  in  repute  with  many 
of  the  Gnostics  to  make  it  entirely  credible  that  they  bor- 

4-12,  iii.  9-10),  and  set  forth  the  divine  plan  in  creation  and  redemption 
(i  Cor.  ii.  9-1 1 ).  Again,  what  have  we  in  Romans  as  a  whole  but  this 
same  theme  of  the  revealed  purpose  of  God  in  creation  and  redemption 
(xi.  31-36)  ?  Here  the  full  extent  of  what  is  meant  by  the  cosmic  atone- 
ment is  but  darkly  hinted  in  chapter  viii,  and  the  union  of  Jew  and  Gen- 
tile in  the  new  people  of  God  in  chapters  ix-xi  is  only  a  hope.  But  in 
Ephesians,  with  the  supplemental  parallels  of  Colossians,  Paul  opens 
wide  to  us,  as  no  imitator  could,  the  doors  of  that  comprehensive  cosmic 
philosophy  of  his  faith  "  (B.  W.  Bacon,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment, pp.  118,  119). 

1  Among  others  Von  Soden,  Haupt,  Lightfoot,  Moule,  and  T.  K. 
Abbott. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  183 

rowed  from  his  phraseology. ^  In  general  it  may  be  said 
of  Paul's  vocabulary  that  variation  through  a  wide  scale 
is  nothing  intrinsically  improbable.  The  creative  force 
of  the  man,  joined  with  a  continuous  change  of  environ- 
ment, naturally  wrought  for  the  use  of  new  terms.  As 
Mahaffy  has  noticed,  the  roving  Greek  writer,  Xenophon, 
presents  a  parallel  in  respect  of  a  progressive  vocabulary. 
His  later  tracts  abound  in  words  —  many  of  them  used 
only  once — that  are  not  contained  in  his  earlier  writings,^ 
In  reply  to  the  further  objection  that  one  of  the  epis- 
tles under  consideration  incorporates,  in  moderately  varied 
phrase,  portions  of  the  subject-matter  of  the  other,  ^  it 
may  be  said  that  the  admission  of  this  fact  does  not 
make  seriously  against  the  Pauline  authorship  of  either. 
Indeed,  the  most  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  resem- 
bling features  in  the  two  lies  in  the  supposition  that  they 
were  composed  near  the  same  time,  and  that  much  in 
one  was  sufficiently  in  the  memory  of  the  writer  to  be 
reproduced  in  the  other.  Another  than  the  author  of 
Colossians,  attempting  to  blend  parts  of  it  with  matter 
of  his  own,  would  almost  inevitably  have  given  more  of 

1  Criticism  manifestly  tends  to  the  conclusion  that  nothing  in  the 
references  to  heresy  in  Colossians  necessarily  points  to  a  time  subse- 
quent to  the  rise  of  the  great  Gnostic  systems.  In  the  opinion  of 
Jiilicher  the  Gnosticism  opposed  here  was  even  older  than  Christianity 
(Einleitung,  p.  105).  "That  there  existed,"  says  Harnack,  "a  Jewish 
Gnosticism,  before  there  was  a  Christian  or  Jewish -Christian,  is  indubi- 
table" (Geschichte  der  altchristlichen  Litteratur,  I.  144). 

2  Cited  by  Salmon,  Historical  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Books 
of  the  New  Testament,  p.  470. 

3  A  marked  relation  of  this  sort  is  undeniable.  It  is  estimated  that 
out  of  the  one  hundred  and  fifty-five  verses  contained  in  Ephesians 
seventy-eight  show  a  distinct  kinship,  in  point  of  phraseology,  with 
Colossians  (Salmond  in  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  III.  215). 


l84  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  appearance  of  patchwork  to  his  composition  than 
Ephesians  actually  presents ;  and  the  same  may  be  said 
of  Colossians,  should  Ephesians  be  deemed  the  prior 
epistle. 

As  respects  the  relation  of  contrast  between  the  two 
epistles,  a  satisfactory  explanation,  it  may  be  admitted, 
is  not  quite  so  readily  afforded.  And  here  the  burden 
of  objection  falls  undoubtedly  upon  Ephesians.  For 
Colossians  a  weighty  attestation  is  provided  in  the  fact 
that  it  reflects  the  same  historical  situation  which  is 
implied  in  the  letter  to  Philemon,  the  genuineness  of 
which  is  so  thoroughly  evidenced  by  its  tone  and  con- 
tent that  the  criticism  which  attempts  a  challenge  inevi- 
tably discredits  itself.^  Along  with  this  advantage  the 
Colossian  epistle  can  claim  to  stand  apart  from  the 
general  body  of  the  Pauline  writings  by  a  somewhat 
narrower  margin  of  peculiarity  than  that  which  distin- 
guishes the  Ephesian  epistle.  The  latter  carries  to  a 
greater  extreme  the  feature  of  complex  sentences  — 
sentences  formed  by  the  addition  of  clause  to  clause  in 
long  succession.  It  gives  also  a  special  impression  of 
mysticism,  and  shows  the  most  points  of  approximation 
to  the  Johannine  type  of  any  writing  which  bears  the 
name   of   Paul.^     But   while   the    case    is    stronger   for 


1  Well  does  Renan  say  of  this  little  epistle :  "  Few  are  the  pages 
which  show  so  pronounced  a  tone  of  sincerity.  Paul  alone,  so  far  as  it 
appears,  was  capable  of  that  short  masterpiece."     (Saint  Paul,  p.  13.) 

2  Ephesians  shows  a  likeness  to  the  fourth  Gospel  in  the  stress  upon 
both  love  and  knowledge,  in  the  symbolical  use  of  the  terms  "light" 
and  "  darkness,"  in  the  reference  to  the  indwelling  of  Christ,  in  the 
description  of  regeneration  as  a  quickening  of  the  dead,  in  the  repre- 
sentation of  sanctification  or  cleansing  as  taking  place  by  the  medium 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  185 

Colossians  than  for  Ephesians,  it  does  not  follow  that 
the  Pauline  authorship  of  Ephesians  is  made  improbable. 
In  a  man  of  such  versatility  as  was  Paul  variation  in 
mood  and  in  the  absorbing  point  of  view  may  be  sup- 
posed to  have  been  capable  of  effecting  very  appreciable 
differences  in  writings  adjacent  to  one  another  in  the 
chronological  order.  Then,  too,  the  fact  that  Ephesians 
was,  at  least  in  a  relative  sense,  a  general  epistle,  written 
without  respect  to  the  local  conditions  of  any  specific 
congregation,  may  be  regarded  as  favorable  to  the  free 
movement  of  reflective  thought,  and  so  tending  to  impart 
to  this  product  of  the  mellower  years  of  the  great  apostle 
a  distinctive  tone.  But  whatever  remains  to  be  explained, 
we  find  in  the  deep  soul  of  Paul  the  probable  source  of 
this  mighty  effusion,  as  against  any  man  who  would 
venture  to  impersonate  Paul.  It  carries  in  itself  no 
mean  attestation  of  genuineness  in  the  vitality  of  senti- 
ment with  which  it  is  pervaded.  As  Findlay  remarks  : 
"  For  our  author  the  revelation  has  lost  none  of  its 
novelty  and  surprise.  He  is  in  the  midst  of  the  excite- 
ment it  has  produced,  and  is  himself  its  chief  agent  and 
mouth-piece.  This  disclosure  of  God's  secret  plans  for 
the  world  overwhelms  him  by  its  magnitude,  by  the 
splendor  with  which  it  invests  the  divine  character,  and 
the  sense  of  his  personal  unworthiness  to  be  intrusted 
with  it.  We  utterly  disbelieve  that  any  later  Christian 
writer  could  or  would  have  personated  the  apostle,  and 

of  the  word,  in  making  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  dependent  on  the 
ascension  of  Christ.  Compare  i.  4  in  Eph.  with  xvii.  24  in  John ;  ii.  2 
with  xii.  31 ;  ii.  5,  6  with  v.  21,  25  ;  iii.  6  with  x.  16 ;  iii.  17  with  xiv.  20, 
23 ;  iv.  7  with  iii.  35 ;  iv.  8-10  with  iii.  13,  xvi.  7  ;  v.  8  with  xii.  35 ;  v.  11, 
13,  with  iii.  20,  21 ;  v.  26  with  xv,  3,  xvii.  19. 


l86  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

mimicked  his  tone  and  sentiments  in  regard  to  his  voca- 
tion, in  the  way  the  critical  hypothesis  assumes.  The 
criterion  of  Erasmus  is  decisive  :  Nemo  potest  Paulinum 
pectus  effingere."  ^ 

4.  The  Pastoral  Epistles,  or  those  addressed  to  Timo- 
thy and  Titus,  must  be  regarded  as  composed  an  appre- 
ciable interval  after  all  other  extant  writings  associated 
with  Paul.  As  Zahn  states,  there  is  no  tenable  ground 
for  maintaining  their  Pauline  authorship  unless  the  release 
of  the  apostle  from  the  Roman  imprisonment  described 
in  Acts  and  his  renewed  missionary  activity  are  accepted 
as  facts.2  If  from  the  hand  of  Paul,  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
must  have  been  written  at  a  stage  in  his  life  quite  dis- 
tinct from  that  represented  by  Philippians,  Colossians, 
and  Ephesians. 

As  respects  external  evidences,  the  genuineness  of 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  is  fairly  well  supported.  The 
ground  for  doubt  lies  mainly  in  their  spirit  and  contents. 
On  this  score  the  following  objections  are  urged  :  (i)  It 
is  difficult  to  believe  that  Paul  in  writing  to  his  familiar 
companions  in  labor  could  have  thought  it  necessary  to 
speak  in  such  a  defensive  strain  respecting  his  apostolic 
vocation  as  appears  in  various  sentences  of  these  epistles.^ 
(2)  The  tone  of  the  addresses  to  Timothy  and  Titus  is 
excessively  paternal.  We  should  not  expect  that  the 
apostle,  in  communicating  with  men  who  had  been  for 
years  trusted  colaborers,  would  think  it  necessary  to  re- 
mind them  of  the  most  ordinary  duties.  Then,  too,  the 
reference  to  Timothy's  youth  cannot  be  regarded  as  apt, 

iThe  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  in  Expositor's  Bible,  p.  6. 

2  Einleitung,  I.  435.  »  j  Tim.  i.  12-17,  ".  7  I   2  Tim.  i.  3,  11. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  187 

when  it  is  considered  that  he  must  have  been  older  than 
was  Jesus  at  the  time  of  His  crucifixion  and  quite  as  old 
as  was  Paul  at  the  beginning  of  his  apostolic  ministry. 

(3)  As  regards  language,  these  letters  afford  a  very 
equivocal  testimony  for  Pauline  authorship.  The  list  of 
words  that  do  not  occur  elsewhere  in  the  writings  of  the 
apostle  is  relatively  large ;  and  moreover  there  is  a 
marked  absence  of  the  characteristic  Pauline  particles.^ 

(4)  The  way  in  which  the  writer  lumps  together  hereti- 
cal teachings,  and  simply  denounces  rather  than  refutes 
them,  is  below  the  plane  of  Paul's  discrimination  and  in- 
tellectual fertility.  (5)  In  respect  of  force  and  conti- 
nuity of  thought  there  is  a  decided  falling  short  of  the 
Pauline  measure.  (6)  While  a  certain  base  of  Pauline 
conceptions  is  apparent  in  the  epistles,  the  governing 
tone  is  more  akin  to  post-apostolic  moralism,  or  the  early 
Catholic  system,  than  to  the  tenor  of  Paul's  dogmatics. 
In  place  of  the  Pauline  stress  on  faith,  as  a  means  of 
reconciliation  and  transforming  union  with  God,  and  on 
the  life  of  sonship,  we  have  a  recurring  mention  of  the 
good  conscience,  of  godliness,  of  sound  doctrine,  and  of 
faith  viewed  as  one  of  the  \irtues  or  even  as  a  sum  of 
truth  to  be  confessed.  ^ 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  urged  that  there  are  personal 
items  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  which  cannot  reasonbly  be 

iThe  following  particles  and  prepositions  are  mentioned  by  Bacon 
(Introduction,  p.  139)  as  being  wanting:  apa,  8iO,  Siort,  hrura,  crt, 
tSe,  iSov,  ^-qiTiJiv,  oTrtog,  ovk€tl,  ovtto),  ovre,  ttoXlv,  iv  TravTL,  Trore, 
TTOV,  uxnrepy  avrt',  aXP'j  e/ATrpocr^ev,  tveKCV,  irapa  with  the  accusative, 

<TVV. 

2  The  use  of  faith  in  this  objective  sense  occurs  in  i  Tim.  iv.  i,  vi, 
10,  21 ;   Titus  i.  4. 


l88  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

attributed  to  any  other  hand  than  that  of  Paul ;  that  they 
contain  genuinely  Pauline  turns  of  expression ;  that  they 
include  not  a  few  names  of  which  there  is  no  mention 
either  in  the  Acts  or  in  the  epistles  of  Paul,  whereas 
one  attempting  to  impersonate  the  apostle  would  natu- 
rally have  borrowed  from  these  sources  such  names  as 
it  might  be  convenient  to  use;  and  that  Paul,  feeling 
that  he  had  paid  his  debt  to  constructive  theology,  might 
very  naturally  in  communications  to  administrators  di- 
verge from  the  line  pursued  in  his  earher  epistles,  and 
put  a  special  stress  upon  matters  pertaining  to  church 
order.  That  there  is  a  very  appreciable  weight  in  some 
of  these  considerations  is  intimated  by  the  tendency  of 
recent  criticism,  even  when  denying  the  Pastoral  Epis- 
tles as  a  whole  to  Paul,  to  admit  that  -they  were  based 
upon  notes  or  fragments  of  genuine  epistles.  So  have 
decided  among  others  Hesse,  Harnack,  McGiffert,  and 
Bacon.  Among  those  who  accept  this  conclusion  it  is 
the  common  verdict  that  of  the  three  epistles  Second 
Timothy  bears  most  of  a  Pauline  impress.  As  the  sub- 
ject now  stands,  we  consider  that  we  shall  be  rendering 
sufficient  tribute  to  critical  objections  by  separating  this 
group  of  epistles  from  the  rest,  and  treating  of  their  sub- 
ject matter  in  the  concluding  section  of  the  chapter. 

II. —  The  Sources  of  the  Pauline  Theology. 

The  question  of  Paul's  relation  to  Pharisaic  Judaism 
and  to  the  Alexandrian  theology,  as  having  already  been 
discussed,^  does  not  need  to  be  considered  in  this  con- 

iSee  Chapter  L 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  189 

nection.  There  are  other  factors,  however,  which  may 
be  supposed  to  have  entered  into  his  equipment.  Here 
belong  the  evangeUcal  tradition,  the  familiarity  of  the 
apostle  with  the  Old  Testament,  and  special  features  of 
his  experience  and  personality. 

I.  The  scanty  reference  to  matters  pertaining  to  the 
life  of  Christ  which  is  found  in  Paul's  epistles  cannot  be 
taken  as  any  sure  token  that  he  did  not  entertain  a  lively 
interest  in  the  facts  of  that  marvellous  biography.  The 
epistolary  literature  of  the  New  Testament  in  general 
is  relatively  silent  respecting  the  works  and  the  words 
of  Christ.  In  brief  productions  of  this  order  the  writers 
not  unnaturally  occupied  themselves  with  cardinal  induc- 
tions from  the  whole  sum  of  gospel  facts,  and  left  to  the 
teacher,  present  with  the  congregation,  to  give  by  word 
of  mouth  the  more  concrete  picture  of  the  Master.) 
That  Paul  did  not  reserve  a  place  for  extracts  from  the 
gospel  story  cannot,  then,  be  regarded  as  by  any  means 
significant  of  an  indifferent  attitude.  No  more  is  a 
trustworthy  evidence  of  lack  of  interest  to  be  found  in 
that  remark  to  the  Corinthians  in  which  he  disparages 
the  notion  of  knowing  Christ  after  the  flesh. ^  To  know 
after  the  flesh  is  to  know  according  to  mere  externals,  to 
judge  by  things  secondary  and  adventitious,  a  Jew  for  ex- 
ample by  his  lineage,  a  rich  man  by  the  trappings  of 
wealth,  a  scholar  by  his  use  of  technical  language.  From 
such  artificiality  and  extemalism  Paul  says  that  he  had 
graduated.  Since  God  had  revealed  His  Son  in  him  he 
had  known  Christ  in  the  spiritual  wealth  belonging  to 
His  person  and  office.     This  revised  point  of  view  does 

I2  Cor.  V.  16. 


J90  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

not  imply  that  henceforth  he  took  no  interest  in  the  facts 
of  Christ's  life ;  it  denotes  rather  that  he  was  disposed 
to  judge  them  by  a  better  than  an  external  standard,  be- 
ing now  in  condition  to  grasp  and  appreciate  their  signi- 
ficance as  being  manifestations  of  the  Lord  and  Saviour 
of  men,  and  not  merely  incidents  in  the  career  of  a  cer- 
tain Nazarene  teacher. 

On  the  side  of  positive  considerations  for  the  conclu- 
sion that  Paul  took  pains  to  acquaint  himself,  as  far  as 
was  possible,  with  the  content  of  the  evangelical  tradi- 
tion, we  may  adduce  the  natural  effect  of  his  enthu- 
siastic love  and  devotion  to  Christ.  How  should  not 
the  earthly  ministry  of  Him  in  whom  was  centred  his 
hope  for  himself  and  the  race  be  an  object  of  earnest  and 
affectionate  interest  .?0- Then,  too,  it  is  in  evidence  that 
at  an  early  point  in  his  course  he  took  pains  to  confer 
with  one  of  those  who  were  best  able  to  recount  the 
gospel  story.^  No  record,  it  is  true,  is  afforded  us 
respecting  the  subject  of  conversation  in  his  fifteen  days' 
interview  with  Peter ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  believe  that 
the  converted  Pharisee  did  not  utilize  the  occasion  to 
learn  what  a  foremost  eye-witness  of  the  life  of  Christ 
was  able  to  impart. \^' It  may  also  be  suggested  that  Paul's 
companions,  Barnabas  and  Mark,  in  virtue  of  their  asso- 
ciation with  the  primitive  disciples,  were  able  in  a  measure 
to  supply  him  with  the  content  of  the  genuine  evangelical 
tradition.  Again,  he  has  indicated  quite  explicitly  that 
he  took  pains  to  acquaint  himself  with  that  tradition  in- 
sofar as  it  bore  on  certain  important  matters.^  V  JFurther- 
more,  in  the  language  of  Paul  an  occasional  echo  of  the 

1  Gal.  i.  i8.  2  I  Cor.  xi.  23,  xv.  3-7. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  191 

words  of  Christ  may  be  discovered.!^  'Once  more,  while 
it  is  true  that  the  apostle  seems  to  place  the  maximum 
stress  upon  the  death  of  Christ  rather  than  upon  his 
life,  yet  it  is  quite  manifest  that  he  could  not  have  disso- 
ciated the  import  of  the  death  from  the  quality  of  the 
life  by  which  it  was  prefaced.  Indeed,  he  has  pro- 
foundly emphasized  the  fact  that  the  one  who  gave  him- 
self to  death  upon  the  cross  was  the  perfectly  obedient 
Son  of  God  who  knew  no  sin.^  Occupying  this  point  of 
view  he  must  be  supposed  to  have  been  interested  in  the 
content  of  Christ's  life  as  affording  ground  for  confidence 
in  His  actual  realization  of  the  ideal  of  sinless  obedience. 
It  results  from  the  foregoing  that  it  does  poor  justice 
to  Paul's  theology  to  regard  it  as  a  speculative  system 
projected  from  his  own  mind  and  swinging  clear  of  a 
historical  basis.  It  was  founded  upon  historic  ante- 
cedents. Back  of  it  all  was  the  revelation  in  and 
through  Christ.  According  to  his  own  conception  the 
apostle  figured,  not  as  a  free-handed  system-maker,  but 
as  an  expounder  of  the  import  of  indubitable  facts.  6  In 
respect  of  form  his  exposition  is  no  doubt  somewhat 
remote  from  Christ's  teaching.  In  place  of  the  calm, 
overmastering,  intuitional  method  of  the  latter,  we  have 
the  struggle  of  the  djsputan^  earnest  argumentation  run- 
ning here  and  there  into  a  subtlety  that  taxes  the  exe- 
getical  faculty  of  the  reader.  The  difference  is  like  that 
between  the  appearance  of  the  stars  when  viewed  on  the 
face  of  the  overarching  sky  and  their  appearance  when 

iGal.  V.  21;  I  Cor.  vi.  9,  vii.  10,  ix.  14,  xv.  50;  Rom.  xii.  19-21;  i 
Thess.  ii.  15,  16,  iv.  15-17,  v.  1-6;  2  Thess.  ii.  2. 
2 Rom.  V.  19;  2  Cor.  v.  21 ;  Phil.  ii.  8. 


192  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

they  are  reflected  in  the  moving  and  uneven  sea.^  Still, 
with  all  its  contrasting  features,  the  Pauline  exposition 
has  very  close  affinity  with  the  teaching  of  Christ.  In 
apprehending  the  interior  and  gracious  character  of  the 
kingdom,  as  it  was  conceived  by  his  Master,  the  apostle 
to  the  Gentiles  was  in  advance  even  of  the  most  free- 
spirited  leaders  within  the  group  of  the  original  disciples. 
2.  In  estimating  the  extent  of  Paul's  dependence  upon 
the  Old  Testament  two  things  need  to  be  kept  in  mind. 
In  the  first  place  it  must  be  granted  that  the  spiritual 
revolution  through  which  he  passed  and  the  task  to 
which  he  was  assigned  made  him  in  an  emphatic  sense  a 
man  of  the  new  dispensation.  He  regarded  the  message 
of  God  in  Christ  as  the  unrivalled  disclosure  of  divine 
wisdom  and  love.  His  heart  was  enkindled  in  the  thought 
of  the  greatness  of  the  gospel  consummation.  It  seemed 
to  him  to  outshine  all  the  glory  of  past  religious  history. 
To  be  conformed  to  it  he  regarded  as  nothing  less  than 
becoming  a  new  creature  and  getting  into  a  new  world. 
From  this  standpoint  he  naturally  did  not  hesitate,  when 
the  occasion  came,  to  cast  a  disparaging  glance  at  the 
legal  system  of  the  Old  Testament.  He  described  it  as 
a  system  more  properly  symbolized  by  the  estate  of  a 
handmaid  than  by  that  of  a  free  woman,  corresponding 
rather  to  the  earthly  Jerusalem  under  a  yoke  of  servitude 
than  to  the  free  city  of  God,  the  Jerusalem  that  is  above. 
It  has  been  concluded  by  many  exegetes  that  Paul  meant 
also  to  disparage  the  legal  system  in  his  representation 
that  it  was  ordained  through  the  ministry  of  angels,^ 
and  was  thus  entitled  to  inferior  honor  as  compared  with 

1  Compare  Beyschlag,  II.  25.  2  Gal.  iii.  19. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  193 

the  scheme  of  grace  which  obtained  a  primary  illustra- 
tion in  God's  dealing  with  Abraham,  and  came  to  its  full 
manifestation  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  This  rendering 
is  favored  by  the  antithesis  which  the  author  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  makes  between  the  Old  Testa- 
ment message  voiced  through  angels  and  the  more  glori- 
ous message  voiced  through  the  Son  of  God.^  But  on 
the  other  hand,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  connection 
of  angels  with  the  giving  of  the  law  is  mentioned  in  the 
speech  of  Stephen  as  a  means  of  emphasizing  the  sanctity 
and  importance  of  the  law.^  It  is  to  be  noticed  also  that 
the  New  Testament  picture  of  the  second  advent  shows 
that  it  was  in  line  with  the  religious  custom  of  the  age 
to  dignify  a  great  event  by  associating  the  ministry  of 
angels  therewith.  In  the  absence,  then,  of  a  formal  con- 
trast between  direct  divine  agency  and  angelic  agency, 
there  is  room  for  a  shade  of  doubt  as  to  the  meaning 
which  the  apostle  designed  to  put  into  his  words.  He 
may  have  brought  in  the  reference  to  the  mediation  of 
the  law  through  angels  in  deference  to  the  current  Jewish 
description.  It  may  be  granted,  however,  that  the  refer- 
ence seems  to  acquire  increased  pertinency  if  taken  as 
designed  to  mark  the  secondary  place  pertaining  to  the 
law. 

The  other  consideration  which  needs  to  be  kept  in 
mind  is,  that  Paul's  vital  consciousness  of  the  new  in 
the  gospel  dispensation  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  so  far 
displacing  the  Old  Testament  content  from  his  mind  but 
that  he  retained  a  large  residuum  from  its  teaching.  In 
the  background  of  his  theological  construction  there  re- 

1  Heb.  ii.  2,  3.  2  Acts  vii.  53. 


194  NEW  TESATMENT  THEOLOGY 

mained  continuously  the  general  conceptions  of  God's 
nature  and  attributes,  of  divine  providence  in  the  world, 
of  man's  nature,  and  of  his  metaphysical  and  ethical  re- 
lations to  God,  virhich  are  set  forth  in  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures. It  is  to  be  observed  furthermore  that  Paul's 
formal  attitude  toward  the  law  is  not  to  be  taken  as  pre- 
cisely descriptive  of  his  attitude  toward  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. As  his  reference  to  the  justification  of  Abraham 
indicates,  he  found  upon  its  pages  anticipations  of  the 
divine  method  which  he  regarded  as  distinctive  of  the 
gospel  dispensation. 

Putting  the  two  considerations  together,  we  reach  the 
conclusion  that  the  enthusiasm  of  Paul's  soul  was  centred 
upon  points  of  view  special  to  Christianity,  but  that 
nevertheless,  as  a  natural  result  of  his  training,  he  held 
fast  a  considerable  framework  of  Old  Testament  concep- 
tions. He  cherished  but  little  independent  interest  in 
the  oracles  of  the  older  dispensation;  yet  his 'interest 
was  not  meagre,  inasmuch  as  he  regarded  that  dispensa- 
tion as  fulfilling  a  great  providential  office  in  preparing 
for  the  effectual  publication  of  the  gospel. 

In  his  formal  estimate  of  the  Hebrew  revelation  the 
apostle  probably  did  not  take  time  to  revise  the  current 
view  of  inspiration.  Where  he  found  matter  that  was 
not  well  suited  to  edify,  a  favorite  exegetical  expedient 
of  the  age  invited  him  to  help  out  the  lessons  of  holy 
writ  by  recourse  to  typical  or  allegorical  meanings. 
Still,  instances  of  this  style  of  interpretation  do  not 
abound  in  his  epistles.  For  the  most  part  they  are  such 
as  might  easily  be  suggested  to  a  mind  filled  with  the 
vision  of  Christ  and  convinced  that  the  real  function  of 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  195 

the  Old  Testament  was  to  prepare  the  way  for  Christ.^ 
To  a  mind  thus  conditioned  it  could  seem  only  an  un- 
worthy impoverishment  of  the  significance  of  the  sacred 
oracles  to  tie  them  down  continuously  to  the  plain  literal 
sense.  And  in  truth,  whatever  may  be  thought  of  the 
apostle's  manipulation  of  typical  meanings  in  Old  Testa- 
ment passages,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  in  the  very  na- 
ture of  the  case  an  earlier  stage  in  a  progressive  unfold- 
ment  evolves  types  of  things  pertaining  to  the  later  and 
more  perfect  stage.  Evolutionary  science  of  the  most  un- 
poetic  description  will  not  shun  to  acknowledge  this 
truth. 

3.  The  experience  of  Paul  cannot  be  reckoned  a  sub- 
ordinate factor  in  his  theological  equipment.  In  both 
of  its  divisions,  Jewish  and  Christian,  it  served  to  fur- 
nish him  with  intense  convictions.  'For  a  man  of  his 
earnestness  of  spirit  to  attempt  to  work  out  salvation  by 
the  legal  method  was  naturally  fruitful  of  insight  into 
the  difficulties  of  the  method.  His  attempt  to  measure 
up  to  the  law,  however  successful  in  outward  and  super- 
ficial respects,  he  knew  to  be  a  failure  in  respect  of  the 
deeper  requirements.  Renewed  struggle  brought  a  re- 
newed sense  of  his  shortcomings.  The  inward  schism 
seemed  past  healing.  He  recognized  the  goodness  of 
the  standard  which  the  law  set  before  him,  but  mastery 
was  wanting  over  the  impulses  which  were  continually 
exciting  to  rebellion.  So  the  commandment  which  was 
ordained  unto  life  became  like  a  sentence  of  death.  The 
ordinary  Pharisee  would  have  eliminated  much  of  the 
bitterness  of  the  situation  by  dwelling  on  the  grounds  of 

1  See  Gal.  iv.  21-31 ;  i  Cor.  x.  4;  2  Cor.  iii.  13-17. 


196  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

self-approval.  But  Paul  was  not  an  ordinary  Pharisee 
any  more  than  Martin  Luther  at  Erfurt  was  an  ordinary 
monk.  So  he  pushed  on  in  the  attempt  to  work  out  his 
justification  before  the  law,  and  knew  full  well  the  smart 
and  pain  of  conscious  failure.  Here  was  the  preparation 
for  his  transformation  into  the  Christian  apostle.  It  has 
been  conjectured  that  the  reasonings  and  the  demeanor 
of  the  Christians  whom  he  pursued  in  his  persecuting 
zeal  had  wrought  in  some  measure  to  undermine  his  as- 
surance that  he  was  serving  the  truth  in  his  onslaught 
upon  them.  In  point  of  theory  this  is  not  incredible. 
There  is,  however,  no  warrant  for  it  in  recorded  history. 
The  New  Testament  gives  no  hint  of  such  an  antecedent 
of  Paul's  conversion.  The  only  preparation  for  conver- 
sion to  which  it  points  us  is  the  negative  preparation  in- 
volved in  the  painful  striving  for  salvation  on  a  legal 
basis,  which  is  sketched  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans.  The  experienced  impotence  of 
the  Pharisaic  method  to  bring  spiritual  life  and  inward 
satisfaction  disposed  him  to  embrace  a  method  which 
should  approve  itself  as  really  successful,  and  to  advo- 
cate it  with  whole-souled  ardor. 

With  the  revelation  of  the  risen  Christ  came  the  vision 
of  the  new  and  the  better  method.  What  he  could  not 
achieve  by  the  way  of  self -subjection  to  the  law  he  found 
attainable  by  faith  upon  Christ.  It  was  as  if  a  friendly 
hand  had  reached  down  from  the  sky  and  lifted  him  up 
to  a  new  plane  of  living.  In  union  with  Christ  he  had 
peace,  sense  of  emancipation,  power  for  overcoming  self 
and  the  world.  His  horizon  was  at  once  greatly  widened 
out  and  greatly  illuminated.     His  sympathies  broke  over 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  197 

their  old  bounds,  and  an  end  was  brought  into  view,  so 
glorious  and  so  vividly  apprehended,  that  in  its  pursuit 
suffering  and  privation  could  be  regarded  as  subtracting 
practically  nothing  from  the  sum  total  of  personal  well- 
being. 

These  contrasted  orders  of  experiences  could  not  fail  to 
act  potently  upon  Paul's  theological  thinking.  They  seem 
to  have  borne  fruit  very  speedily.  The  Pharisaism  of 
their  subject  was  inverted,  or  turned  in  respect  of  cardi- 
nal features  into  the  opposite.  The  experience  of  legal 
bondage  and  the  experience  of  emancipation  through 
Christ  combined  to  divert  his  appreciation  from  the 
method  of  legal  performance  to  the  method  of  faith,  of 
trustful  self-committal,  of  heart  union  with  a  gracious 
Redeemer.  In  renouncing  dependence  upon  the  legal 
method  he  relinquished  the  main  support  of  Jewish  exclu- 
siveness,  for  it  was  in  particular  the  law  which  fenced 
Israel  away  from  the  rest  of  the  world.  In  a  scheme  of 
grace  no  good  reason  could  appear  for  maintaining  divid- 
ing lines  between  Jew  and  Gentile.  Paul  advanced, 
therefore,  readily  to  the  standpoint  of  Christian  univer^ 
saHsm.  The  method  and  the  greatness  of  his  own  deliver, 
ance  dictated  that  he  should  look  to  Christ  as  representing 
an  economy  gloriously  transcending  the  old  legal  economy. 
By  natural  sequence  he  regarded  Him  as  not  merely  the 
Jewish  Messiah  but  the  world's  Saviour.  He  was  true 
to  the  lessons  of  his  experience  in  that  he  gravitated 
into  a  theology  Christo-centric  and  world-embracing  in 
its  outlook. 

The  special  manner  in  which  Christ  was  revealed  to 
Paul  before  the  gates   of  Damascus  had  doubtless  its 


198  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

effect  upon  his  habitual  representation  of  his  Master. 
The  image  which  remained  before  his  mind  was  that  of 
a  transcendently  glorious  being,  so  that  spontaneously 
he  confessed  His  lordship,  and  through  his  ministry 
continued  by  preference  to  call  Him  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  Still  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  suppose  that 
Paul's  glance  was  directed  solely  to  the  glory  of  Christ 
as  the  ascended  Lord.  He  has  indicated  very  distinctly 
that  the  humiliation  of  his  Master  was  much  in  his 
thought.  The  one  conception  wrought  with  the  other  to 
enkindle  simultaneously  reverence  and  affection.  The 
result  was  a  devotion,  an  absorption  in  Christ  marvel- 
lously intense  and  unwavering.  Next  to  Christ's  own 
sense  of  union  with  the  Father  in  heaven  the  most 
unique  expression  of  the  inner  life  of  the  spirit  in  the 
New  Testament  is  found  in  Paul's  sense  of  union  with 
Christ. 

The  characteristics  of  Paul's  personality  cannot  be 
regarded  as  holding  an  indifferent  relation  either  to  the 
espousal  or  the  propagation  of  his  special  theological 
type.  At  the  foundation  was  genuine  earnestness. 
Half-hearted  allegiance  to  what  he  esteemed  to  be  the 
truth  was  foreign  to  his  disposition.  Depth  of  feeling 
and  energy  of  will  were  quite  as  much  factors  in  his 
make-up  as  strength  of  thought.  He  was  far  from  being 
the  passionless  logician  or  hard-headed  scholastic.  Doubt- 
less he  had  a  certain  fondness  for  argument  and  a  good 
degree  of  argumentative  force  and  dexterity..  But  the 
fire  of  emotion  was  ever  blending  with  his  thinking  and 
inciting  his  speech  to  pass  over  from  the  plane  of  logic 
to  that  of  oratory.     This  combination  gives  great  vitality 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  igg 

to  his  writings  and  makes  them  a  perpetual  source  of 
spiritual  impulse,  though  of  course  it  involves  some  lia- 
bility of  mistaken  interpretation,  especially  on  the  part 
of  those  who  refuse  to  recognize  the  element  of  fervid 
oratory  and  insist  on  construing  the  apostle  as  a  mere 
logician.  His  nature  was  too  broad  to  be  described  by 
a  single  category.  It  was  after  an  ecumenical  type. 
Jewish  depth  of  religious  feeling,  Hellenic  zest  for  argu- 
ment and  speculation,  and  Roman  energy  of  will  and 
consequent  ability  for  conquest  had  each  a  counterpart 
in  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 

ni. —  General  Conceptions  of  God,  of  the  World, 

AND  OF  THE    RATIONAL   CREATION,    WHICH  UNDER- 
LIE THE  Pauline  Epistles. 

Paul's  conception  of  God  may  be  defined  as  the 
Hebraic  modified  by  the  revelation  in  Christ  and  by 
personal  experience.  On  the  metaphysical  side  he 
manifests  no  ambition  to  serve  as  an  expounder  of  the 
divine  nature.  The  ideas  which  he  brings  forward  in 
this  relation  are  the  same  as  those  to  which  Old 
Testament  prophecy  at  its  zenith  gave  expression.  He 
abides  by  its  combination  of  distinct  personality  with 
transcendent  greatness.  So  far  as  can  be  judged,  he 
attributes  the  being  as  well  as  the  particular  forms  of 
things  to  creative  efficiency.  The  creation  was  a  means 
of  bringing  to  manifestation  the  invisible  power  of  God.i 
He  is  the  one  God  of  whom  are  all  things.^  He  is  able 
to  do  exceeding  abundantly  above  all  that  we  ask  or 
1  Rom.  i.  19,  20.         2  J  Cor.  viii.  6;  2  Cor.  v.  18 ;  Eph.  iii.  9. 


200  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

think.^  Instrumentalities  which  the  natural  judgment 
of  men  condemns  as  feeble  and  ineffective  He  is  com- 
petent to  arm  with  victorious  potency.  The  foolishness 
of  God  is  wiser  than  men,  and  the  weakness  of  God  is 
stronger  than  men.^  All  striving  is  empty  of  result 
apart  from  His  cooperation.  Neither  is  he  that  planteth 
anything,  nor  he  that  watereth,  but  God  giveth  the  in- 
crease.^ To  glory  in  men  is  to  fail  of  all  sense  of  per- 
spective. Before  God's  unsearchable  wisdom  and  omnipo- 
tence any  creaturely  endowment  passes  utterly  out  of 
the  field  of  competition.* 

In  portraying  the  ethical  nature  of  God  the  apostle 
takes  account  preeminently  of  love  and  righteousness. 
His  tribute  to  the  former  is  limited  only  by  the  resources 
of  his  vocabulary.  To  his  thought  the  love  of  God  mani- 
fested in  Christ  is  like  a  luminous  abyss  whose  height 
and  depth  and  length  and  breadth  surpass  all  the  meas- 
urements of  the  human  understanding.^  It  is  the  primal 
motive  power  in  the  divine  heart,  a  spring  overflowing 
with  benefits  in  advance  of  all  desert.  "God  com- 
mendeth  His  love  toward  us,  in  that  while  we  were  yet 
sinners  Christ  died  for  us."^  It  shapes  the  divine  admin- 
istration throughout  its  wide  domain.  To  those  who  are 
responsive  to  its  claims  all  things  are  made  to  work 
together  for  good.''  It  is  exceedingly  tenacious,  holding 
those  whom  it  has  won  with  bonds  which  neither  life 
nor  death  nor  angels  nor  principalities  nor  powers  can 
sever .^     It  is  the  pattern  to  which  appeal  may  be  made 

1  Eph.  iii.  20.  2  I  Cor.  i.  18-25.  ^  ^  ^°^-  "i-  7- 

*i  Cor.  iii.  18-23;  Rom.  viii.  3i,xi.  33.  *  Eph.  iii.  18-19. 

«  Rom.  V.  8.  '  Rom.  viii.  28.  ^  Rom.  viii.  38,  39. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  201 

in  behalf  of  all  gracious  conduct  among  men.  The 
tenderness  of  heart  which  prompts  one  freely  to  forgive 
his  fellow  has  its  archetype  in  God  with  His  generous 
message  of  forgiveness.^  He  is  the  God  of  love  and 
peace.^ 

The  indirect  tributes  which  the  apostle  renders  to  the 
love  of  God  vie  with  the  direct.  Among  these  must  be 
reckoned  the  incomparable  hymn  contained  in  the  thir- 
teenth chapter  of  First  Corinthians.  It  is  not  indeed 
specifically  the  love  of  God  that  is  celebrated  in  this 
lofty  strain.  But  such  an  eulogy  as  is  here  recorded 
must  be  regarded  as  containing  an  implicit  reference  to 
the  divine  nature.  To  commend  love  as  the  highest 
possible  endowment  in  those  who  are  born  of  God  and 
exalted  into  His  likeness  is  equivalent  to  declaring  that 
it  is  supremely  characteristic  of  God  Himself.  The 
apostle  may  also  be  regarded  as  celebrating  the  praise  of 
divine  love  in  all  his  discourse  about  the  grace  of  God.^ 
For  what  is  grace,  on  the  divine  side,  but  love  viewed  as 
operative  in  the  bestowment  of  unearned  benefits  ?  Once 
more,  Paul  renders  tribute  to  the  same  theme  in  his 
emphasis  upon  the  divine  fatherhood,  since  this  is  a 
name  for  deep  and  enduring  affection.  His  exposition 
of  this  aspect  of  divine  character  and  relationship  does 
not,  it  is  true,  carry  us  back  fully  into  the  atmosphere  of 
the  Gospels.  Jesus  had  a  prerogative  in  the  exposition 
of  this  theme  which  has  fallen  to  no  other.  He  spoke 
as  the  child  of  the  household  who  dwelt  in  unclouded 
intimacy  with  the  Father.     Paul  could  speak  only  as  the 

lEph.  iv  32.  2  2  Cor.  xiii.  11. 

8Rom.  iii.  24,  iv.  16.  V.  15-21 ;    2Cor.  viii.  9;    Eph.  i,  6,  7,  ii.  7,  8,  iii.2. 


202  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

converted  man  and  the  theologian.  He  leaves  no  room 
for  doubt,  however,  as  to  his  lively  interest  in  the  sub- 
ject. At  the  opening  of  every  epistle  he  makes  refer- 
ence to  God  as  Father.  He  indicates  that  a  chief  part 
in  the  ministry  of  the  Holy  Spirit  consists  in  producing 
a  sense  of  love  and  fellowship  which  shall  call  forth  the 
name  of  Father  in  the  spontaneous  utterance  of  the 
heart.i  Furthermore,  he  characterizes  fatherhood  in  God 
as  reaching  to  the  widest  limits.  He  is  the  Father  from 
whom  every  family  in  heaven  and  earth  is  named.^ 

'  The  divine  righteousness,  of  which  Paul  prefers  rather 
to  speak  than  of  the  divine  holiness,  was  doubtless  funda- 
mental to  his  thought  of  God.  As  used  by  him  it  stands 
for  essential  rectitude,  conformity  in  feeling  and  in  con- 
duct to  the  ethical  reality  of  things  as  it  is  disclosed  to 
His  all-penetrating  glance.  It  is  incompatible  with  any 
artificial  judgment  or  attitude,  and  so  excludes  respect 
of  persons.^  For  the  same  reason  it  is  a  ground  of 
wrath,  not  as  though  it  shuts  out  compassion,  but  be- 
cause in  the  fitness  of  things,  in  proportion  as  a  man 
gives  himself  to  sin  and  cancels  in  himself  the  poten- 
tiality of  goodness,  he  becomes  an  object  of  displeasure 
to  Him  who  cannot  have  pleasure  in  sin.  In  fact  the 
apostle  speaks  of  an  expenditure  of  goodness,  forbearance, 
and  long  suffering  upon  those  who  at  the  same  time  by 
their  impenitence  are  treasuring  up  wrath  against  the 
day  of  wrath.*  Righteousness,  as  true  to  the  reality  of 
things,  dictates  wrath  against  the  sinner  in  the  man,  while 
simultaneously  it  permits,  not  to  say  requires,  compassion 

iRom.  viii.  15,  16 ;  Gal.  iv.  6.  ^  Rom.  ii.  11 ;  Gal.  ii.  6. 

2Eph.  iiii.  15.  *  Rom.  ii.  4,  5. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  203 

toward  the  man  in  the  sinner.^  As  regards  the  relation 
of  righteousness  to  love  Paul  has  not  intimated  that  there 
is  any  disharmony  between  the  two.  Nothing  that  he 
has  said  stands  in  the  way  of  the  rational  consideration 
that  righteousness  puts  no  veto  whatever  on  the  benevo- 
lent aim  of  love,  and  merely  conditions,  as  wisdom  may 
be  conceived  to  do  also,  its  manifestation. 

Along  with  stress  upon  the  love  and  righteousness  of 
God  the  apostle  urges  a  very  emphatic  view  of  the 
sovereign  control  of  God  over  the  course  of  history. 
Taken  by  themselves  some  of  his  sentences,  it  must  be 
granted,  may  seem  to  carry  over  the  notion  of  a  master- 
ful providence  into  an  affirmation  of  arbitrary  power,  and 
so  to  collide  with  the  proper  conception  of  both  love  and 
righteousness.  But  it  is  a  well-approved  canon  of  inter- 
pretation that  fervid  oratorical  discourse  must  be  taken 
according  to  its  tenor.  Now  it  is  beyond  question  that 
Paul  teaches  the  freedom,  responsibility,  and  gracious 
opportunity  of  men  in  general.^  Expressions  in  this  line 
have  no  less  claim  to  notice,  in  a  judgment  on  his  posi- 
tion, than  expressions  which  magnify  the  overshadowing 
prerogative  and  might  of  God.  Holtzmann,  it  is  true, 
prefers  to  discern  in  the  latter  the  philosophy  of  the 
apostle,  and  to  take  the  former  as  spoken  in  a  homileti- 
cal  or  oratorical  vein.^  We  find,  however,  no  warrant 
for  this  discrimination.  On  the  contrary,  there  are  no 
passages  in  Paul's  writings  which  have  more  the  appear- 

1  Augustine,  Tract,  in  Joan,  ex.  6 ;  Beyschlag,  New  Testament  The- 
ology, II.  93. 

2  Rom.  i.  28,  32,  ii.  4-1 1,  26,  27,  vi.  12,  13,  x.  12,  xi.  19-23. 
*  Lehrbuch  der  neutest.     Theol.  II.  169, 


204  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ance  of  fervid  oratory  than  those  which  push  to  the  ut- 
most  the  notion  of  divine  sovereignty.  This  is  clearly 
the  fact  in  relation  to  the  passage  which  more  than  any 
other  repudiates  limitations  upon  divine  choice  and  ac- 
tion.^ The  apostle  is  engaged  here  in  an  ad  hominem 
argument.  He  wishes  to  disarm  the  man  who,  in  his 
conviction  that  a  preferred  place  belongs  to  Israel,  is 
stumbled  over  the  advancement  of  the  Gentiles.  Hence 
he  exalts  the  will  of  God  to  the  utmost  as  against  all 
grounds  of  precedence  recognized  by  men.  He  puts 
forward  the  most  extreme  instances  that  he  can  find. 
He  disparages  utterly  man's  ability  to  call  God  to  ac- 
count, and  compares  the  prerogative  which  He  has  over 
creaturely  instruments  to  that  of  the  potter  over  the  clay. 
He  thus  asserts  the  right  of  God  as  against  any  human 
challenge.  But  does  he  go  on  to  say  that  God,  on  His 
part,  is  minded  to  exercise  this  right  with  unfeeling  arbi- 
trariness.? Just  the  reverse.  Having  silenced  the  parti- 
san of  Judaism  who  would  limit  the  divine  choice  accord- 
ing to  his  own  narrow  preference,  he  proceeds  to  illustrate 
that  the  actual  policy  of  God  is  in  the  highest  degree 
benevolent,  accordant  with  the  conduct  and  the  needs 
of  men,  and  directed  to  the  end  of  bringing  as  many  as 
possible  to  the  salvation  in  Christ.^  Are  the  Jews  cast 
off  for  the  time  being }  It  is  on  account  of  their  lack  of 
faith.  Are  the  Gentiles  elected.?  It  is  because  they 
follow  after  righteousness  by  faith,  and  their  admission 
is  not  designed  to  shut  out  the  Jews,  but  to  provoke 
them  to  jealousy  and  to  bring  about  ultimately  that  all 
Israel  should  be  saved.     Are  the  Jews  brought  in  t     It 

1  Rom.  ix.  14-24.  2  Rom.  x.,  xi. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  205 

is  not  that  the  opportunity  of  the  Gentiles  should  be 
abridged,  but  that  the  receiving  of  them  should  be  to 
the  world  at  large  life  from  the  dead.^     God's  hand  is 
doubtless  conceived  as  a  powerful  factor  in  the  historic 
process  which  leads  to  the  great  end  in  view.     But  the 
historic  process  itself,  with    its  special    expedients  and 
combinations,    becomes  an    inept   play  except   as  it    is 
viewed   as  a  necessary  means    of    operating  with    free 
agents,  who  are  open  to  persuasion  and  whose  consent 
needs  to  be  won.     It  is  out  of  reason  to  suppose  that  the 
apostle  did  not  regard  such  a  process  as  having  a  princi- 
pal ground  in    the  freedom  of   its  subjects.     Thus,  in 
spite  of   the  hard  sayings  with  which  he  rebuked  the 
Jewish   assumption  of  a  special   claim  upon    God,  the 
tenor  and  outcome  of  the  apostle's  argument  show  his 
conviction  that  the  divine  procedure  is  at  once  directed 
by  the  largest  benevolence  and  respectful  of  man's  free 
agency.     In  no  other  connection  has  he  used  language 
which  certifies    to  a  different    conviction.     The   divine 
election  of    which    he    speaks  in    several   instances  ^  is 
viewed  indeed  as  being  before  the  standard  of  man's  de- 
serts  perfectly  gratuitous,  but    there  is  no   declaration 
that  it  is  irrespective  of  the  consent  of  the  individual  to 
divine  overtures,  or  that  it  arbitrarily  secures  to  one,  and 
arbitrarily  excludes  from  another,  the  measureless  boon 

1  So  greatly  does  Paul  modify  in  the  following  chapters  the  picture 
of  overmastering  sovereignty  given  in  the  ninth,  that  this  remark  of 
Garvie  can  hardly  be  counted  extravagant :  *'  The  arbitrary  omnipotent 
potter  is  a  caricature  of  controversy,  not  a  portrait  of  faith  ;  and  Paul 
has  himself  to  abandon  his  own  work."  (New  Century  Bible,  Romans, 
p.  224.) 

*  Rom.  viii.  29,  30 ;  Eph.  i.  5,  6. 


206  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

of  eternal  life.  The  conditions  on  man's  side,  which 
the  apostle  so  distinctly  recognizes  when  he  discourses 
on  the  appropriation  of  salvation,  he  must  have  supposed, 
in  all  consistency,  to  have  been  regarded  by  God  in  the 
shaping  of  His  eternal  purpose. 

In  the  view  of  Paul,  God  is  revealed  in  the  natural 
world,  in  conscience,  in  human  history  at  large,  in  the 
life  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  finally  in  Christ  as  the 
image  of  God's  perfection  and  the  complete  expression 
of  His  gracious  will.  Upon  the  revelation  in  nature  he 
touches  but  lightly,  noticing  in  general  terms  that  the 
visible  world  testifies  to  the  power  and  divinity  of  the 
Creator.!  Possibly  in  popular  discourse  he  may  have 
made  more  ample  reference.  Were  we  to  judge,  how- 
ever, from  his  writings,  we  should  conclude  that  nature 
was  no  such  book  of  divinity  to  him  as  it  was  to  Jesus. 
The  poetic  sensibility  toward  the  objects  of  the  natural 
world  which  has  left  its  tinge  upon  the  Gospels  is  not 
discoverable  in  his  epistles.  Not  a  passage  can  be  cited 
which  shows  that  he  was  penetrated  with  the  charm  of 
natural  scenery.  He  has  indicated,  nevertheless,  that 
in  one  point  of  view  he  had  a  sympathetic  bearing  to- 
ward nature.  He  felt  the  shadow  of  transitoriness  and 
decay  hovering  over  her  domain.  It  seemed  to  him  that 
she  had  been  despoiled  of  her  ideal,  in  order  to  keep 
company  with  the  despoiled  children  of  God.  By  a 
figure  of  speech  he  represents  her  as  if  conscious  of  the 
cleft  between  her  state  of  vanity  and  the  ideal  designed 
for  her  in  the  divine  mind,  and  so  describes  her  as  groan- 

1  Rom.  i.  19-20. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  20/ 

ing  after  the  glorious  era  when,  in  conjunction  with  the 
completed  redemption  of  the  sons  of  God,  she  shall  be 
redeemed  from  bondage,  and  present  thenceforth  a  scene 
unsullied  by  corruption  and  death.^ 

No  formal  exposition  is  given  by  the  apostle  of  his 
conception  of  the  cosmic  system.  We  gather,  however, 
that  he  recognized  an  ascending  series  of  spheres.  He 
makes  a  passing  mention  of  an  under  world. ^  Recalling 
an  ecstatic  experience  of  his  own,  he  represents  himself 
as  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven.^  Again,  he  pictures 
the  risen  Christ  as  ascending  far  above  all  heavens.'* 
Probably  in  all  this  there  was  little  aim  at  exactness. 
We  take  sufficient  account  of  his  language,  if  we  regard 
it  as  recording  simply  a  general  impression  that  in  the 
world  system  there  is  a  gradation  of  spheres  to  which 
belong  severally  different  measures  of  divine  manifes- 
tation.^ 

As  in  relation  to  the  cosmic  spheres,  so  also  in  relation 
to  the  classes  or  ranks  of  spiritual  being,  Paul  is  not  to 
be  regarded  as  having  attempted  to  define  with  precision. 
It  is  quite  evident  that  he  thought  of  angels,  and  like- 
wise of  evil  spirits,  as  constituting  a  sort  of  hierarchy; 
but  as  is  intimated  by  variation  in  the  terms  used,  he 
did  not  assume  to  have  an  exact  knowledge  of  gradations 
withm  the  hierarchy,  and  enumerated  them  rather  for 
the    sake    of    extending   the   point    of   view   which    he 

1  Rom.  viii.  19-23.      2  phu.  ii.  10.      3  2  Cor.  xii.  2.     *  Eph.  iv.  10. 

fi  That  Paul  does  not  mention  specifically  a  sphere  above  the  third 
cannot  be  regarded  as  decisive  of  the  scheme  which  he  had  in  mind.  It 
is  known  that  Jewish  thought  very  generally  assumed  a  series  of  seven 
heavens.     (Salmond,  article  *'  Heaven,"  in  Hastings'  Diet,  of  the  Bible.) 


208  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

happened  to  be  enforcing  to  the  widest  possible  Hmit, 
than  for  the  purpose  of  giving  a  lesson  in  angelology.^ 
The  angelic  powers,  as  he  conceived,  share  in  the  benefit 
of  Christ's  reconciling  work,  in  the  sense  that  that  work 
removes  barriers  between  different  parts  of  the  rational 
creation,  and  fulfills  its  aim  in  joining  all  closely  together 
in  one  spiritual  unity.^  On  the  functions  of  angels  he 
says  next  to  nothing.  Incidentally  he  refers  to  them  as 
witnesses  of  the  extremity  of  despite  and  suffering 
appointed  to  the  apostles.^  According  to  one  interpre- 
tation of  the  enigmatic  passage  in  i  Cor.  xi.  lo,  he  had 
in  mind  the  Jewish  thought  that  angels  are  guardians 
over  the  constituted  order  of  the  world  and  interested 
in  keeping  each  rank  to  its  proper  place.*  If  this  was 
actually  the  thought  of  the  apostle,  it  implies  an  emi- 
nence and  jurisdiction  in  angels  that  do  not  harmonize 
well  with  the  supposition  that  he  thought  of  men  as 
qualified  to  judge  angels  of  the  unf alien  class.  More- 
over the  general  New  Testament  picture  of  good  angels 
as  trusted  agents  of  the  heavenly  kingdom,  and  as  render- 
ing an  ideal  service  to  that  kingdom,  is  far  from  suggest- 
ing their  amenability  to  human  judgment.  It  is  to  be 
esteemed  doubtful,  therefore,  that  Paul,  when  he  spoke 
of  Christians  as  destined  to  judge  angels,^  distinctly  in- 
cluded the  obedient  order  in  his  thought. 

1  See  Eph.  i.  21  ;  Col.  i.  16,  ii.  10;  Rom.  viii.  38;  i  Thess.  iv.  16; 
also  I  Cor.  xv.  24;  Eph.  vi,  12. 

2  Col.  i.  20.  3  I  Cor.  iv.  9. 

*  Heinrici,  Sendschreiben  an  die  Korinther.  Compare  Toy,  Judaism 
and  Christianity,  p.  153.  A  competing  interpretation  makes  the  refer- 
ence to  be  to  the  respect  due  to  angels  viewed  as  heavenly  guests, 
present  at  the  meeting  for  worship. 

fi  I  Cor.  vi.  3. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  209 

In  relation  to  evil  spirits,  Paul  indicates  his  recognition 
of  a  certain  headship  in  Satan  by  naming  him  the  prince 
of  the  power  of  the  air.^  This  expression,  joined  with 
the  reference  to  the  spiritual  hosts  of  wickedness  in  the 
heavenly  places,^  makes  it  probable  that  he  thought  of 
the  lower  or  atmospheric  heaven  as  the  special  seat  of 
evil  spirits.  His  language  in  i  Cor.  x.  20,  21  points  to 
a  belief  that  demons  were  patrons  of  heathen  idolatries, 
and  the  vivid  description  of  spiritual  antagonists  in  Eph. 
vi.  12  makes  it  quite  evident  that  he  credited  the  evil 
host  with  a  considerable  agency  in  the  world.  Still,  we 
are  warned  against  attributing  to  him  a  too  emphatic 
notion  of  diabolical  workings  when  we  observe  that  in 
his  most  sombre  picture  of  the  origin  and  progress  of 
sin  among  men,  as  given  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
he  makes  no  reference  to  Satan  or  to  the  evil  spirits 
confederated  with  him.  It  is  properly  observed  also 
that  Paul  was  not  at  all  minded  to  concede  that  the 
natural  world  is  the  property  of  Satan.  As  was  noticed 
above,  he  associated  its  destiny  with  the  ideal  consum- 
mation awaiting  the  children  of  God.  Moreover  the 
cosmic  significance  which  he  assigned  to  Christ  implies 
that  the  world  falls  under  divine  ownership,  and  that 
Satan  has  no  real  title  to  its  rule.  Thus  a  point  of  view 
which  seriously  compromises  the  divine  headship  over 
the  world  cannot  be  charged  against  the  apostle. 

In  his  description  of  man  Paul  is  distinguished  among 
New  Testament  writers  by  the  extent  to  which  he  in- 
clines to  the  use  of  trichotomist  terminology.     To  desig- 

1  Eph.  ii.  2.  2  Eph.  vi.  12. 


210  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

nate  the  highest  in  man  he  employs  the  term  "  spirit " 
(TTvevfia).  (In  referring  to  this  factor  his  language  is 
not  always  so  definite  as  to  exclude  the  inquiry  as  to 
whether  he  means  the  Holy  Spirit  resident  in  men,  or 
the  human  spirit  regarded  as  the  proper  organ  for  com- 
munication with  the  divine  and  as  quickened  and  illumi- 
nated thereby.  This  naturally  results  from  the  fact  that 
the  aim  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  of  the  human  spirit  ruled 
by  the  influence  of  the  former  must  be  identical.  That 
Paul  considered  a  finite  spirit  to  be  a  constituent  of  the 
human  individual  as  such  is  made  abundantly  evident 
by  his  references.^  While  the  apostle,  on  the  whole, 
assigns  a  certain  preeminence  to  the  spirit,  it  may  be 
questioned  whether  he  went  so  far  as  to  distinguish  it 
from  the  soul  {'^vxn)  in  respect  of  substance,  i  Thess. 
V.  23  may  indeed  be  cited  in  favor  of  an  affirmative  con- 
clusion ;  but  the  apparent  distinction  here  may  be 
regarded  as  due  to  amplification  for  the  sake  of  empha- 
sis.2  In  various  connections  the  apostle  seems  to  in- 
clude under  the  term  soul  the  whole  nature  of  man  as  a 
subject  of  emotional  and  volitional  experience.^  His  total 
usage,  however,  implies  a  certain  contrast  between  soul 
and  spirit.  The  former  may  be  said  to  denote  the 
interior  man  in  close  relation  to  the  sensuous  side  of 
his  being,  the  latter  the  interior  man  as  holding  God- 
ward  relations.  This  contrast  is  especially  conspicuous 
in  the  adjective  forms  i/ri;;\;t/co9  and  irvevfiaTLKO';.^     The 

iRom.  i.  9,  viii.  16;  i  Cor.  ii.  11,  v.  4,  5,  vii.  34,  xiv.  14,  xvi.  18;  2 
Cor.  ii.  13,  vii.  i,  13 ;  Gal.  vi.  18;   i  Thess.  v.  23. 
2  Compare  Luke  x.  27. 

8  Rom.  ii.  9,  xiii.  i ;  2  Cor.  i.  23,  xii.  15 ;  Phil.  i.  27. 
*i  Cor.  ii.  14,  15. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  211 

apostle's  use  of  the  word  mind  (voik)  answers  partially  to 
that  of  spirit,  as  being  put  in  opposition  to  the  flesh.^  It 
denotes  in  such  connection  the  seat  of  the  reflective 
intelligence.  In  i  Cor.  xiv.  it  is  associated  with  the 
ordinary  sphere  of  consciousness,  while  the  spirit  is 
viewed  as  capable  of  being  rapt  up  into  ecstatic  fellow- 
ship with  God. 

A  further  distinction  of  the  Pauline  anthropology  is 
an  explicit  stress  upon  race  connection.  No  other  New 
Testament  writer  has  made  any  specific  account  of  the 
bond  with  the  sinning  Adam.  Paul  distinctly  accentu- 
ates such  a  bond.  Exegesis  has  sometimes  concluded, 
on  the  basis  especially  of  Romans  v.  12,  that  he  even 
thought  of  the  whole  race  as  sinning  in  Adam  and  un- 
dergoing condemnation  with  him.  Attention  has  been 
called  to  the  force  of  the  aorist  tense  in  the  clause  "all 
sinned  "  (TraWe?  ij/xaprov),  as  indicative  of  a  definite  past 
act  of  sin,  and  not  merely  of  the  fact  that  all  who  have 
lived  have  fallen  at  one  time  or  another  into  sin.  And 
where,  it  is  asked,  is  this  definite  act  to  be  found  except 
in  the  trespass  of  Adam?  But  this  argument  rests  on 
a  very  unsubstantial  ground.  The  aorist  of  dfjiaprdvco  is 
repeatedly  used  in  the  New  Testament  in  the  sense  of 
the  perfect,  and  has  been  so  rendered  by  the  translators.^ 
In  short  it  is  quite  gratuitous  to  charge  upon  Paul  the 
artificial  notion  that  the  whole  race  sinned  and  incurred 
guilt  in  the  sin  of  Adam.  What  the  apostle  may  reasona- 
bly be  regarded  as  designing  to  teach  is,  that  the  Adamic 
trespass  was  the  fountainhead  of  the  general  tendency 

1  Rom.  vii.  23,  25. 

2  Rom.  ii.  12,  iii.  23;  Luke  xv.  18,  21 ;  i  Cor.  vii.  28. 


212  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

in  men  to  sin,  and  thus  a  source  of  ultimate  condemna- 
tion, since  a  pronounced  tendency  commonly  passes  on 
into  act.  The  sin  of  Adam  was  the  sin  of  his  posterity 
only  in  the  sense  of  being  a  potentiality  of  sin  in  them, 
just  as  the  crucifixion  of  Christ  was  a  potentiality  of 
the  crucifixion  of  the  sinful  nature  in  men.^  Nothing 
that  the  apostle  has  written  requires  us  to  suppose  that 
he  thought  that  the  condemnation  strikes  men  before 
the  evil  potentiality  issues  into  act.  The  words  in  Eph. 
ii.  3,  "  by  nature  children  of  wrath,"  are  to  be  compared 
with  the  statement  in  Rom.  ii.  14,  that  **  the  Gentiles 
do  by  nature  the  things  of  the  law."  In  neither  case 
is  the  reference  to  a  birth  condition  proper.  The  Gen- 
tiles are  not  so  much  born  doers  of  the  law  as  born 
with  a  nature  the  unfoldment  of  which  brings  them  in 
due  time  to  a  sense  of  the  obligations  of  the  moral  law. 
In  like  manner  Jews  and  Gentiles  are  not  literally  born 
children  of  wrath,  but  born  with  natures  which  universal 
experience  shows  tend  to  the  order  of  works  which  invite 
the  divine  displeasure.^ 

The  darker  phases  of  human  condition  are  doubtless 
sketched  in  the  Pauline  writings  with  much  vigor.  But 
the  counterpart  is  also  painted  •  with  a  powerful  hand. 
The  apostle  indeed  runs  into  a  glowing  optimism  when 
he  considers  the  possibilities  and  certainties  of  human 
destiny  on  the  side  of  connection  with  the  Second 
Adam. 

1  Rom.  vi.  6;  2  Cor.  v.  14. 

'  On  the  character  and  scope  of  the  suggestions  which  antecedent 
Judaism  may  have  furnished  to  Paul  respecting  the  relation  of  Adam's 
sin  to  the  race,  see  F.  R.  Tennant,  The  Sources  of  the  Doctrines  of  the 
Fall  and  Original  Sin. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  213 

If  we  put  together  the  elements  of  the  Pauline  view 
of  the  world  system,  we  must  acknowledge  that  it  has  a 
somewhat  imposing  aspect.  It  is  notably  a  world  that 
is  under  a  law  of  movement.  Things  are  in  procession. 
The  various  ranks  of  being  are  directed  toward  a  lofty 
consummation.  Not  only  are  all  things  from  God ;  all 
things  are  likewise  to  Him.^  For  the  creation  generally 
the  goal  lies  in  a  sphere  of  incorruption  and  transfigured 
existence,  where  God  is  all  in  all,  not  as  overbearing  dis- 
tinctions of  individuality,  but  as  beatifying  and  harmo- 
nizing all  beings  through  their  close  relation  to  Himself. 

IV.  —  The  Chief  Pauline  Antitheses — Flesh  and 
Spirit,  Law  and  Grace. 

The  reader  of  the  Pauline  epistles  very  soon  discovers 
that  the  term  flesh  (crdp^)  is  frequently  used  in  a  larger 
than  the  plain  physical  signification.  While  literally  it 
denotes  the  pliable  substance  of  a  living  physical  organ- 
ism, and  thus  is  related  to  body  (acofia)  as  the  specific  to 
the  general,  in  many  instances  it  evidently  incorporates 
an  ethico-religious  sense.^  From  what  point  of  view  did 
the  apostle  attach  to  it  this  meaning  ?  Did  he  proceed 
from  the  standpoint  of  Hellenic  dualism,  and  thus  regard 
the  flesh  in  virtue  of  its  material  as  intrinsically  evil, 
from  its  very  nature  antagonistic  to  the  spirit  in  man 
with  its  sense  of  obligation  to  a  moral  ideal  ?  Or,  did  he, 
putting  a  part  for  the  whole,  intend  to  denote  by  the  flesh 
unrenewed  human  nature,  man  viewed  as  dominated  by 

1  Rom.  xi.  36. 

2  For  example  in  Rom.  vii.  18.  viii.  4-9;  Gal.  v.  16-24. 


214  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  desires  and  passions  which  have  their  sphere  of  mani- 
festation especially  in  the  bodily  members  ?  The  latter 
we  believe  to  be  by  far  the  more  credible  interpretation. 
The  main  reasons  for  preferring  it,  as  against  the  nar- 
rower meaning  in  the  direction  of  Hellenic  dualism,  are 
the  following  :  (i)  The  apostle  includes  in  his  catalogue 
of  the  works  of  the  flesh  various  orders  of  sins  which 
have  no  special  association  with  the  physical  members.^ 
The  natural  inference  is  that  by  flesh  he  meant  more 
than  the  mere  instrument  of  the  sensuous  life.  (2)  The 
connections  in  which  the  phrase,  "  our  old  man,"  is  used 
are  such  as  to  show  that  its  meaning  is  substantially 
equivalent  to  that  assigned  to  the  flesh .2  We  have 
accordingly  a  plain  hint  that  the  latter  term  connotes 
something  beyond  the  sensuous  nature  proper.  (3)  The 
apostle  refers  to  Christians  as  those  who  can  appropri- 
ately be  reckoned  as  being  no  longer  in  the  flesh.^  This 
is  as  much  as  indicating  that  flesh  is  not  a  name  for  an 
intrinsically  evil  substance  ;  for,  in  that  event  disengage, 
ment  from  its  contamination  and  thraldom  could  not  well 
be  thought  of  as  realized  anterior  to  its  literal  destruc- 
tion or  severance  from  the  spirit.  (4)  Paul  dignifies  the 
body  by  representing  it  as  worthy  to  be  quickened  by 
the  Spirit  of  God,  as  fit  to  be  offered  to  God  in  sacrifice 
or  consecration,  as  being  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
as  being  a  subject  along  with  soul  and  spirit  for  complete 
sanctification.*  It  may  be  alleged,  it  is  true,  that  body 
diSfoi'm  is  to  be  distinguished  from  flesh  which  is  a  term 

1  Gal.  V.  19-21. 

2  Rom.  vi.  6 ;  Eph.  iv.  22  ;  Col.  iii.  9.  ^  Rom.  vii.  5,  viii.  9. 
*  Rom.  viii.  11,  xii.  i ;  i  Cor.  vi.  19;  i  Thess.  v.  23. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  215 

descriptive  of  substance.  But  certainly  in  most  of  the 
instances  just  cited  the  distinction  is  impertinent.  Who 
can  believe  that  the  apostle  meant  to  give  such  terms  as 
sacrifice,  sanctification,  and  indwelling  an  exclusive  appli- 
cation to  corporeal  outlines  ?  He  has  plainly  discounte- 
nanced such  artificial  construction  in  that,  on  the  one 
hand,  he  has  represented  the  flesh  itself  to  be  a  subject 
for  sanctification,iand  on  the  other  has  pictured  the  body 
as  the  seat  of  the  same  disorderly  motions  which  he  has 
ascribed  to  the  flesh .^  (5)  The  apostle  indicates  that  he 
did  not  regard  the  flesh,  in  the  character  of  material  sub- 
stance, to  be  intrinsically  evil,  inasmuch  as  he  conceives 
Christ  both  to  have  come  in  the  flesh  and  to  have  been 
sinless.  The  latter  point  is  unequivocally  asserted  in  2 
Cor.  V.  21.  The  former  point  is  implied  in  Paul's  ascrip- 
tion of  real  birth  and  real  death  to  Christ.^  It  is  also 
intimated  in  the  statement  that  Christ  came  in  the  like- 
ness of  sinful  flesh  [kv  oyuoiu)y.aTi  (Tapico<^  a/ia/arta?),  and 
was  instrumental  in  condemning  sin  in  the  flesh.^  The 
interposition  of  the  word  "  likeness  "  in  this  text  is  to  be 
regarded  as  a  token  of  the  apostle's  unwillingness  to 
attribute  shiful  flesh  to  Christ  while  yet  he  attributes 
flesh  to  Him.  (6)  In  treating  of  the  origin  of  sin  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans  Paul  does  not  make  it  a  necessary 
offspring  of  the  sensuous  nature  with  which  man  was 
originally  endowed,  but  ascribes  it  to  the  trespass  of 
Adam.^  It  has  been  contended  indeed  that  the  con- 
trast which,  in  another  connection,  he  draws  between 
the  first  Adam  and  the  last  Adam^  implies  that  the 

1 2  Cor.  vii.  I.     3  Rom.  i.  3  ;  Gal.  iv.  4  ;  Phil.  ii.  8.     ^  Rom.  v.  12-19. 
2  I  Cor.  ix.  27.  *  Rom.  viii.  3.  ^  i  Cor.  xv.  45-47. 


2l6       NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

former  from  the  start,  as  possessed  of  flesh,  had  in  him- 
self a  positive  ground  of  sin.  But  there  is  inadequate 
reason  for  supposing  that  the  apostle  fell  into  the  self- 
contradiction  implied  in  this  interpretation.  In  the  pas- 
sage under  consideration  he  takes  Adam  in  general  as  a 
type,  without  pausing  to  discriminate  closely  between 
his  state  before  the  fall  and  that  which  was  character- 
istic of  him  afterwards.  As  he  stands  out  in  history  he 
appears,  on  the  whole,  weak,  earthly,  corruptible,  and  so 
may  be  placed  in  contrast  with  the  thoroughly  incor- 
ruptible and  pneumatic  nature  of  the  risen  and  ascended 
Christ.  As  respects  man  before  the  fall,  it  is  not  at  all 
necessary  to  suppose  that  the  apostle  thought  of  him  as 
characterized  by  a  positive  bent  to  evil,  as  well  as  by 
immaturity  and  lack  of  firm  grasp  on  the  higher  good. 
Thus  the  teaching  in  Romans,  ascribing  the  origin  of 
sin  to  an  act  rather  than  to  a  necessity  of  nature,  may 
stand  as  truly  representative  of  the  apostle's  conviction, 
and  serve  to  confirm  the  conclusion  that  by  flesh  he 
means,  when  he  gives  the  term  an  ethico-religious  signifi- 
cance, not  the  physical  substance  of  the  body,  but  the 
natural  or  unrenewed  man,  whose  passions  and  desires 
find  a  special  vehicle  of  manifestation  in  the  bodily 
members.  (7)  Had  Paul  thought  of  the  fleshly  sub- 
stance as  intrmsically  evil,  he  would  naturally  have  been 
driven  to  show  a  larger  predilection  for  ascetic  theory 
and  practice  than  he  has  exhibited.  On  that  basis  we 
should  not  expect  from  him  such  sentences  as  appear  in 
the  Colossian  Epistle.^  No  one  who  was  immersed  in 
the  postulates  of  asceticism  would  naturally  have  written 
in  that  strain. 

iCol.  ii.  16,  20-23. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  21/ 

The  Pauline  antithesis  between  flesh  and  spirit  de- 
notes that  man's  being  is  a  battlefield  of  opposing  tend- 
encies, and  that  there  is  no  chance  for  him  to  fulfill  his 
true  end  save  in  alliance  with  a  power  which  is  able  to 
reinforce  the  Godward  tendency,  and  to  make  it  more 
than  a  match  for  the  earthward.  A  similar  meaning 
belongs  to  the  antithesis  between  law  and  grace. 

By  the  law,  as  the  term  is  employed  in  the  more 
formal  discussions  of  the  apostle,  is  meant  the  Mosaic 
law  in  its  entirety.  This  in  its  moral  part  distinctly  pro- 
claims the  law  which  is  written  upon  man's  conscience, 
and  thus  deepens  responsibility  for  obedience.  The 
great  office  of  the  law,  as  described  in  the  epistles  to  the 
Galatians  and  Romans,  is  so  to  convict  men  of  their  sin,'^ 
and  so  to  reveal  to  them  their  bondage  in  sin,  that  they 
shall  be  prepared  to  accept  the  divine  remedy.  It  pro- 
vokes to  sin,  that  is  to  concrete  sinful  acts  (Tra/ja/SaW?, 
TrapaTTTw/ittTa),  in  the  sense  that  it  challenges  the  natural 
impulses  of  men,  and  thus  brings  their  latent  sinfulness 
{d/jLapTLo)  to  manifestation.  By  reaction  against  it  the 
sinner  comes  to  a  knowledge  of  himself  as  a  sinner  con- 
demned and  in  thraldom.  There  is  no  question  about 
its  sanctity.  It  is  holy,  righteous,  and  good.^  The 
trouble  with  it  is  its  practical  impotence  to  bring  salva- 
tion. Here  it  always  fails.  Its  office  is  rather  to  con- 
vince of  the  need  of  salvation  than  to  save.  It  is  a 
schoolmaster  to  bring  men  to  Christ.  It  educates  up  to 
receptivity  for  the  method  of  grace,  the  method  of  self- 
committal  to  a  Redeemer  and  of  personal  heart  union  with 

1  Rom.  vii.  12. 


2l8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Him.  At  the  point  of  this  consummation  the  law  in 
one  sense  is  abrogated.  Christians  are  not  under  law 
but  under  grace. ^  That  is,  their  standing  is  not  meas- 
ured by  their  record  of  legal  obedience  but  by  their  pre- 
sent relation  to  God  in  Christ.  This  relation,  however, 
inevitably  involves  willing  compliance  with  the  ethical 
requirements  of  the  law.  The  renewed  heart  in  virtue 
of  a  spiritual  dynamic  coming  from  a  personal  affiance 
with  the  Saviour  yields  a  measure  of  obedience  which  it 
could  not  render  on  the  plane  of  mere  legal  striving. 
Thus,  in  another  sense,  the  law  is  established.  While 
it  ceases  to  be  the  object  toward  which  the  Christian  be- 
liever looks  for  justification,  it  becomes  in  its  ethical  con- 
tent the  ideal  toward  which  a  power  of  life,  as  well  as 
his  own  continuous  endeavor,  transports  him. 

Criticism  has  been  passed  upon  Paul's  exposition  of 
the  function  of  Old  Testament  law.  It  has  been  said 
that  the  whole  intent  of  the  law  was  not  exhausted  in 
merely  bringing  the  sinfulness  of  men  to  manifestation, 
and  so  convincing  them  of  the  need  of  a  gracious  rescue 
at  the  hands  of  God ;  that  the  law  in  fact  aimed  to  de- 
velop a  positive  righteousness,  which,  if  not  of  an  ideal 
type,  had  nevertheless  a  certain  worth  for  human  society 
and  the  divine  kingdom.  The  criticism  would  not  be 
wholly  unjust,  if  Paul's  silence  on  this  aspect  of  the  sub- 
ject were  to  be  taken  as  equivalent  to  denial.  But  it  is 
not  necessarily  so  taken.  Paul  had  occasion  to  check- 
mate an  attempt  to  thrust  the  law  forward  into  the  place 
of  a  rival  of  the  gospel.  Naturally  therefore  he  consid- 
ered the  law  preeminently,  not  to  say  exclusively,  in  its 
relation  to  the  gospel,  and  dwelt  upon  the  fact  that  its 

1  Rom.  vi.  14. 


La 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  219 

office  was  fulfilled  in  preparing  for  a  more  potent  and 
gracious  dispensation  by  convincing  men  of  their  sinful- 
ness and  need.  Over  against  the  partisans  of  an  ultra 
legal  scheme  he  considered  it  important  to  set  forth  the 
incompetency  of  the  law  to  reach  the  supreme  end — 
assured,  personal  salvation.)  He  was  passing  judgment 
upon  it  in  relation  to  this  end.  That  he  counted  it  in- 
competent to  bring  to  this  high  goal  is  no  sure  token 
that  he  would  not  have  been  willing  to  concede  to  it  a 
useful  office  in  modifying  individual  and  community  life. 
The  exigencies  of  the  time  in  which  he  wrote  called 
forth  the  apostle's  exposition  of  this  theme.  In  its 
main  tenor,  however,  that  exposition  is  of  perennial  sig- 
nificance. It  remains  for  ever  true,  that  at  the  stage  of 
maturity  religious  living  must  be  on-  the  basis  of  heart 
fellowship  and  spiritual  dynamic,  and  that  a  scheme  of 
formal  rules  belongs  to  a  preliminary  and  inferior  stage. 


V. — The  Person  of  Christ. 

Since  Paul  did  not  attempt  a  minute  exposition  of 
christology,  it  is  little  cause  for  surprise  that  his  lan- 
guage falls  short  of  an  explicit  declaration  of  Christ's 
possession  of  a  complete  human  nature.  The  tenor  of 
theological  discussion  in  his  day  did  not  call  for  an  une- 
quivocal expression  on  that  subject.  We  have,  however, 
measurably  satisfactory  hints  of  his  position.  In  stat- 
ing that  Christ  was  "born  of  the  seed  of  David  according 
to  the  flesh,"  that  He  was  of  the  stock  of  Israel,  that  He 
was  born  of  a  woman  under  the  law,  that  He  was  made 
in  the  likeness  of  men,  and  that  He  holds  a  position 


220  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

which  entitles  Him  to  be  spoken  of  as  the  last  Adam,i 
the  apostle  has  given  indubitable  evidence  that  he  con- 
sidered the  Redeemer  to  be  truly  implicated  in  the  race, 
and  has  made  it  credible  that  he  ascribed  to  Him  the  full 
complement  of  human  attributes.  Weiss  contends  that 
the  ascription  of  flesh  (o'dp^)  to  Christ  is  decisive  of  the 
fact  that  a  human  soul  was  recognized  in  Him,  since  in 
the  Pauline  anthropology  flesh  in  the  living  man  is  al- 
ways understood  to  be  ensouled.^ 

That  the  Pauline  christology  assigns  real  preexistence 
to  Christ  is  so  obvious  that  it  can  be  denied  only  in  a 
most  unworthy  spirit  of  dogmatic  desperation.  Critics 
of  the  most  varied  schools  admit  the  assumption  by  the 
apostle  of  a  personal  preexistence.^  No  other  meaning 
can  reasonally  be  ascribed  to  his  emphatic  description  of 
a  voluntary  transition  of  Christ  from  an  estate  of  riches 
and  glory  to  one  of  poverty  and  humiliation.^  The  cos- 
mic function  of  Christ  and  the  office  assigned  to  Him 
under  the  Old  Testament  economy  involve  quite  obvi- 
ously the  same  conclusion.^ 

Another  indisputable  feature  of  the  Pauline  christol- 
ogy is  its  ascription  to  Christ  of  a  nature  and  rank  vastly 
transcending  the  proper  human  scale  and  reaching  up- 

1  Rom.  i.  3,  ix.  5;  Gal.  iv.  4;  Rom.  viii.  3;  Phil.ii.  7;  i  Cor.  xv.45. 

2  Bib.  Theol.  des.  neuen  Testaments,  §  78. 

8  Orello  Cone  by  no  means  takes  an  uncommon  position  for  the  lib- 
eral critic  when  he  says:  "The  terms  employed  by  Paul  relative  to 
Christ's  coming  in  the  flesh  can  only  by  the  most  violent  exegesis  be  re- 
garded as  applicable  to  an  ideal  being  or  principle  existing  in  the  divine 
purpose,  when  we  consider  how  they  must  have  been  understood  by  his 
readers."    (Paul,  the  Man,  the  Missionary,  and  Teacher,  p.  305). 

*  2  Cor.  viii.  9 ;  Phil.  ii.  6-8.  *  Col.  i.  16,  17 ;  i  Cor.  x.  4. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  221 

ward  to  a  divine  plane.  A  glance  at  the  more  salient 
features  of  that  christology  will  show  that  the  above 
terms  are  not  too  emphatic,  (i)  Christ  is  represented 
as  having  a  distinct  headship  over  all  creaturely  ranks. 
No  kind  of  dignitary  beneath  the  divine  throne  is  allowed 
to  come  into  competition  with  Him.j-.  (2)  The  names 
applied  to  Christ  are  such  as  naturally  associate  Him 
with  a  divine  sphere.  He  is  in  a  preeminent  and  dis- 
tinctive sense  the  Son  of  God,  manifested  indeed  to  be 
such  by  His  resurrect ion,^  but  in  nature  and  relation  the 
Son  before,  as  well  as  after,  His  appearance  in  the  flesh.^ 
He  bears  the  name  of  Lord  (/cvpto^),  and  that  in  the 
midst  of  statements  analogous  to  or  identical  with  those 
which  in  the  Old  Testament  set  off  the  name  of  Deity.* 
It  is  not  disproved  that  in  one  instance,  outside  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  the  term  6e6^  is  applied  to  Christ, 
namely  in  Rom.  ix.  5.  If,  on  the  one  hand,  exegetes  of 
a  conservative  tendency  are  not  entirely  unanimous  in 
connecting  the  high  ascription  of  this  verse  with  Christ, 
some  who  are  quite  the  reverse  of  conservative  in  tem- 
per do  not  deny  the  propriety  of  so  interpreting.  Pflei- 
derer,  for  example,  decides  that  to  separate  the  ascription 
at  the  end  of  the  verse  from  the  name  of  Christ  in  the 
preceding  part  is  forced,  and  also  unnecessary  in  con- 
sideration of  the  fact  that  in  Pauline  usage  6e6^  is  not 
always  used  in  a  different  sense  from  that  of  /cvpicy;.^ 
(3)  In  various  instances  an  office  like  that  of  the  Holy 

1  Col.  ii.  10,  15,  19;  Eph.  i.  21-23. 

2  Rom.  i.  4.  8  Rom.  viii.  3  ;  Gal.  iv.  4 :  Col.  i.  13-15. 
*Rom.  X.  9-13 ;  i  Cor.  x.  21,  22 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  16;  2  Thess.  L  9. 
6  The  Influence  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  p.  55. 


222  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Spirit  in  respect  of  spiritual  presence  and  efficacy  is  as- 
signed to  Christ,  His  inner  nature  is  described  as  **  the 
spirit  of  hoHness.''^  He  is  designated  as  the  spiritual 
rock  which  followed  and  refreshed  the  fathers  in  the 
wilderness.2  He  is  described  as  being  in  the  sphere  of 
His  ascension  a  *' life-giving  spirit."^  In  opposition  to 
the  Mosaic  letter,  He  is  declared  to  be  the  Spirit  whose 
presence  brings  liberty.*  Even  as  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
resident  in  believers,  so  Christ  is  conceived  to  dwell  in 
their  hearts  in  answer  to  their  faith.^  It  is  needless  to 
add  that  this  coordination  of  the  agency  of  Christ's 
pneumatic  nature  with  that  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  sugges- 
tive of  a  personality  quite  above  the  creaturely  range. 
(4)  Endowments  and  functions  are  assigned  to  Christ 
which  are  appropriate  to  a  divine  plane  of  being.  All 
the  treasures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge  are  said  to  be 
hidden  in  Him.^  In  Him  dwelleth  all  the  fullness  of  the 
Godhead  bodily.^  He  is  the  one  Lord  through  whom 
and  unto  whom  are  all  things ;  and  He  is  before  all 
things,  and  in  Him  all  things  consist.^  The  awards  of 
the  judgment  day  are  in  His  hand,  and  before  the  ulti- 
mate display  of  His  glory  and  might  all  that  opposes 
shall  sink  into  impotence.^  He  is  the  source  of  grace, 
being  so  designated  in  every  epistle,  either  by  Himself, 
or  in  conjunction  with  the  Father.  In  the  presence  of 
the  greatness  and  universality  of  His  saving  office  earthly 

*  Rom  i.  4.     See  Meyer,  Lipsius,  Godet,  Sanday,  and  Denney. 
2  I  Cor.  X.  4.  «  Col.  ii.  3. 

8  I  Cor.  XV.  45.  '  Col.  ii.  9. 

*  2  Cor.  iii.  17,  18.  ^  i  Cor.  viii.  6;  Col.  i.  16,  17. 

*  Eph.  iii.  17  ;  2  Cor.  xiii.  5.  ®  2  Cor.  v.  10 ;  2  Thess.  i.  7,  8,  ii.  8. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  223 

distinctions  fade  away.  He  is  all  and  in  all.^  The  true 
believer  acknowledges  Him  as  his  life,  and  looks  toward 
Him  as  the  goal  of  His  intensest  aspiration.^  In  short, 
it  is  as  clear  as  the  daylight  that  in  Paul's  view  Christ 
rose  transcendently  above  the  ordinary  creaturely  plane. 
In  manifold  ways  he  ascribes  to  Him  the  practical  value 
of  divinity.  It  cannot  fairly  be  doubted  that  he  esteemed 
Him  to  be  in  an  altogether  unique  way  related  to  the 
Father,  metaphysically  the  Son  of  God  and  as  such  an- 
terior to  the  created  universe. 

On  the  other  hand  Paul  seems  to  have  recognized  a 
certain  subordination  of  the  Son  to  the  Father.  This 
feature  in  his  christology  may  have  been  due  in  part  to 
the  measure  in  which  he  unfolds  the  subject  from  an 
economic  standpoint.  One  contemplating  Christ  fulfill- 
ing in  the  servant  form  His  historic  office  could  very 
naturally  apply  to  Him  forms  of  expression  which  would 
never  be  suggested  in  considering  Him  solely  as  the 
preexisting  Son  of  God.  Since  He  was  actually  the 
Son  of  Man,  it  is  no  cause  for  surprise  that  one  or 
another  phrase  appropriate  to  that  category  should  be 
in  evidence,  as  well  as  a  long  list  of  expressions  appro- 
priate to  the  higher  category.  Even  John,  after  declar- 
ing unequivocally  the  divinity  of  Christ,  could  represent 
Him  to  have  associated  Himself  so  far  with  the  common 
human  standpoint  as  to  designate  the  Father  "my  God." 
An  expression  of  the  same  order  with  Paul  is  no  more 
than  with  John  an  index  of  a  simple  humanitarian  theory. 
It  is  to  be  granted,  nevertheless,  that  in  the  total  repre- 
sentation of  Paul  a  certain  primacy  of  rank,  a  certain 

1  Col.  iii.  1 1.  2  Col.  iii.  4 ;  Phil.  iii.  8,  9. 


224  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

headship  over  the  Son,  is  ascribed  to  the  Father.  Just 
how  this  was  conceived  is  not  to  be  determined  from  the 
data  which  the  apostle  has  given.  We  are  confident, 
however,  that  it  was  not  conceived  in  the  sense  of  the 
more  extreme  interpretation  of  i  Cor.  xv.  24,  28.  This 
passage  is  an  emphatic  description  of  the  recession  of 
the  Son  from  the  theatre  of  His  mediatorial  work,  and 
of  the  all-comprehending  unity  which  at  that  point  is  to 
be  revealed.  To  suppose  that  the  apostle  thought  of  the 
recession  of  the  Son  in  all  respects  from  an  exalted  plane 
of  lordship  is  to  suppose  an  incredible  disjunction  in 
teaching.  He  represents  this  same  Son  as  subsisting 
in  the  form  of  God  before  entering  upon  His  office  of 
mediation,  as  the  being  through  whom  and  unto  whom 
all  things  were  created,  as  the  goal  of  his  own  highest 
hopes  and  deepest  aspirations.  How  then  could  he  think 
of  Him  as  being  really  displaced  from  lordship  ?  A  soul 
so  worshipful  in  its  attitude  toward  Christ  as  that  of 
Paul,  so  enkindled  with  love  to  Him,  so  pervaded  with  a 
sense  of  spiritual  dependence  upon  Him,  could  not  picture 
for  Him  a  place  in  the  heavenly  and  eternal  kingdom 
inferior  to  that  which  is  assigned  in  the  lofty  imagery  of 
the  Johannine  Apocalypse. 

In  two  instances  Paul  describes  in  emphatic  terms  the 
transition  of  Christ  from  His  antecedent  state  of  riches 
and  glory  into  the  state  of  humiliation.^  In  recent  times 
speculative  christology  has  built  upon  these  representa- 
tions a  radical  doctrine  of  kenosis  or  self-depotentiation, 
to  the  effect  that  the  Son  of  God,  stripping  Himself  of 
the  divine  mode  of  being,  came,  in  respect  of  conscious 

I2  Cor.  viii.  9;  Phil.  ii.  6,  7. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  22$ 

life  and  activity,  wholly  into  the  measure  and  mode  of  a 
human  soul  at  the  beginning  of  its  career.  The  incarna- 
tion, it  is  claimed,  meant  the  immeasurable  transformation 
from  a  divine  to  a  purely  human  mode  of  subsistence,  out 
of  which  by  a  process  of  development  the  divine  mode 
was  at  length  regained.  Some  names  of  considerable 
theological  eminence  have  been  subscribed  to  the  doc- 
trine. But  it  has  little  chance  of  coming  into  the 
ascendant.  Not  only  is  it  rationally  indefensible ;  it  is 
exegetically  gratuitous.  So  far  as  we  are  able  to  judge, 
the  weight  of  New  Testament  scholarship  is  decidedly 
on  the  side  of  the  conclusion  that  Paul  did  not  design  to 
describe  a  metaphysical  kenosis,  a  real  self-depotentiation, 
but  only  a  change  as  to  form  of  manifestation.  His 
thought  was,  that  the  preexistent  Son,  instead  of  being 
disclosed  in  His  native  divine  form,  resplendent  with  a 
glory  correspondent  with  His  rank,  presented  Himself 
to  the  human  race  in  the  form  of  a  servant.  The  sup- 
position that  in  the  incarnation  He  was  lost  to  Himself, 
temporarily  self -eliminated,  is  not  required  by  the  apostle's 
language. 

It  is  not  certain  that  Paul  was  ready  to  answer  all 
sorts  of  questions  about  the  nature  and  divine  relation  of 
Christ.  While  he  has  made  statements  which  serve  as 
a  ground  of  metaphysical  inference,  he  dwelt  preemi- 
nently in  the  sphere  of  practical  contemplation.  In 
emphasis  on  the  actual  value  of  Christ  to  the  individual 
and  the  race  he  reached  a  mark  which  no  later  writer, 
whether  an  Augustine,  a  Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  a  Luther, 
or  a  Wesley,  has  transcended.  The  most  fervid  hymns 
which  the  Christian  centuries  have  produced  evince  no 


226  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

warmer  devotion  than  that  which  informs  his  words.  It 
is  worth  while  to  read  his  epistles  a  score  of  times,  just 
to  get  the  measure  of  his  love  for  Christ,  and  to  see  into 
what  glorious  captivity  that  love  could  transport  a  stal- 
wart man. 

VI.  —  The  Holy  Spirit. 

It  was  noticed  in  the  preceding  section  that  Paul 
in  some  instances  ascribes  to  the  pneumatic  nature  of 
Christ  such  offices  as  in  other  connections  he  associates 
with  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  may  indicate  that  in  respect 
of  spiritual  agency  he  did  not  set  off  the  province  of  the 
one  from  that  of  the  other  by  any  distinct  line  of  demar- 
cation. It  by  no  means  proves  that  he  identified  the 
two.  His  total  representation  offers  us  reasons  for 
thinking  that  he  did  not.  If  he  speaks  in  some  in- 
stances of  the  Spirit  of  Christ  as  operative  in  men,^  he 
speaks  in  more  numerous  instances  of  the  Spirit  of  God 
as  thus  operative.^  The  apostle  accordingly  gives  no 
ground  for  merging  the  Holy  Spirit  into  the  person  of 
the  Son  rather  than  into  the  person  of  the  Father.  If 
it  should  be  concluded  that  he  meant  to  give  no  distinct 
standing  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  necessary  inference 
would  be,  that  he  felt  at  liberty  to  apply  the  name  now 
to  the  Father  and  now  to  the  Son,  according  as  he  might 
wish  to  represent  the  one  or  the  other  as  operative  in 
the  spiritual  domain.  As  regards  the  question  of  his 
intent  to  postulate  a  distinct  standing  for  the  Spirit,  the 
data  are  not  very  abundant,  since  he  treats  the  subject 

1  Rom.  viii.  lo ;  Gal.  iv.  6. 

2  Rom.  viii.  9  ;   i  Cor.  iii.  16,  vi.  11,  xii.  3 ;  2  Cor.  iii.  3 ;  Eph.  iv.  30. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  227 

from  the  economic  or  practical  point  of  view.  The  facts 
to  be  noticed  are  that  in  various  connections  he  mentions 
the  Spirit  alongside  of  the  Father,  or  alongside  of  the 
Son,  or  together  with  both.^  Thus  his  language  is  as 
suggestive  of  the  trinitarian  conception  as  any  discourse 
could  be  expected  to  be  which  was  not  governed  by  a 
distinct  effort  at  metaphysical  construction. 

The  distinctive  feature  in  Paul's  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  its  stress  upon  His  agency  in  the  production 
and  sustentation  of  Christain  character  as  such,  His  im- 
manence to  the  believer  as  a  source  of  sanctification.  It 
is  not  to  be  supposed  that  this  point  of  view  was  ignored, 
much  less  consciously  discarded,  by  any  group  of  Chris- 
tian teachers.  Yet  it  must  be  confessed  that  there  are 
tokens  in  the  first  part  of  Acts  of  a  disposition  to  empha- 
size in  particular  the  charismatic  working  of  the  Spirit. 
According  to  the  tenor  of  the  Samaritan  incident,  re- 
counted in  the  eighth  chapter,  the  presence  of  the  Spirit 
seems  to  have  been  identified  with  a  special  afflatus 
manifesting  itself  in  such  sensible  tokens  that  any  by- 
stander, though  of  the  stamp  of  Simon  Magus,  could 
recognize  them  in  their  peculiarity.  Paul  on  his  part 
also  gives  a  place  to  this  charismatic  working,  but  he 
unequivocally  assigns  to  it  a  subordinate  rank.  The 
great  office  of  the  Spirit,  as  he  represents  it,  is  to  pro- 
duce in  men  the  ethical  and  religious  values  which  fill 
out  character  to  its  proper  ideal.  The  fruits  of  His 
presence  are  love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  kindness, 
goodness,   faithfulness,    meekness,    temperance.^     With 

1  Rom.  viii.  16,  26,  27  ;  i  Cor.  vi.  11 ;  2  Cor.  vi.  6,  7,  xiii.  14;  Eph.  il 
18,  iv.  4-6. 
^Gal.  V.  22. 


228  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

these  fruits  no  equipment  of  mere  power  can  compete. 
The  ability  to  speak  with  tongues  or  to  remove  moun- 
tains is  a  poor  accomplishment,  in  comparison  with  the 
love  which  enkindles  to  all  well-doing  and  consumes  all 
inclination  to  ill-doing.^  Here  the  teaching  of  the  apostle 
comes  grandly  into  line  with  that  of  the  Synoptical 
Gospels,  with  its  profound  emphasis  upon  the  worthless- 
ness  of  any  and  every  performance  in  the  name  of  religion 
when  divorced  from  an  ethical  basis. 


VII.  —  The  Reconciling  Work  of  Christ. 

Eminent  exponents  of  the  liberal  school  of  criticism 
in  recent  times  have  concluded  that  in  Paul's  exposition 
of  the  redemptive  work  of  Christ  the  "objective- 
juridical  "  and  the  **  subjective-ethical "  representation 
run  side  by  side,  and  that  neither  is  sacrificed  or  subor- 
dinated to  the  other.2  Exponents  of  a  more  conserva- 
tive scholarship  also  quite  generally  acknowledge  that 
the  two  forms  of  representation  are  closely  associated  in 
the  Pauline  writings.  In  our  opinion  this  is  the  view 
which  has  the  best  exegetical  right.  It  is  to  be  con- 
fessed, both  that  Paul  gave  a  place  to  an  objective 
aspect,  and  that  he  joined  with  this  a  very  decided  stress 
upon  a  subjective  aspect.  In  other  words,  it  is  necessary 
to  credit  him  with  the  conviction  that  Christ's  work, 
especially  as  consummated  in  His  death,  met  at  once  a 

1 1  Cor.  xiii.  See  also  Rom.  v.  5,  viii.  14-16,  xiv.  17;  I  Cor.  vi.  19; 
2  Cor.  xiii.  14;   i  Thess.  i.  6;  Eph.  i.  13,  14,  iv.  30. 

2  Holtzmann,  Lehrbuch  der  neutest.  Tiieol.  II.  117;  Pfleiderer,  Ur- 
christenthum,  223-236. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  229 

demand  of  the  divine  character  and  administration,  and 
a  need  on  man's  part  for  a  most  potent  incentive  to  faith 
and  obedience. 

A  preliminary  ground  for  the  conclusion  that  Paul's 
thinking  included  the  objective  aspect  is  found  in  the 
fact  that  it  was  not  foreign  to  the  religious  mind  in  his 
day.  As  has  been  noticed,  the  Pharisaic  school  in  which 
he  was  trained,  while  not  on  the  whole  well  affected 
toward  the  specific  notion  of  a  suffering  Messiah,  was 
committed  to  the  idea  that,  in  virtue  of  the  solidarity  of 
Israel,  the  suffering  of  one  member  might  have  atoning 
worth  in  behalf  of  another.  Then  too  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  were  easily  suggestive  of  the  possibility  of  an 
efficacious  offering  for  sin.  The  picture  in  the  fifty- 
third  chapter  of  Isaiah  could  not  well  be  excluded  from 
the  mind  of  a  disciple  who  was  inquiring  after  the  mean- 
ing of  the  crucifixion  of  his  Lord.  It  was  not  necessary, 
therefore,  for  the  apostle  to  travel  afar  in  order  to  reach 
the  notion  of  an  atoning  or  reconciling  work  that  was 
inclusive  of  an  objective  aspect. 

A  more  positive  ground  for  imputing  this  notion  to 
the  apostle  is  found  in  his  recognition  of  a  wrath 
element  in  God.^ ,.  The  recoil  of  the  divine  nature  from 
sin,  though  not  viewed  as  excluding  compassion  toward 
the  sinner,  was  regarded  as  most  genuine.  It  is  quite 
conceivable  therefore  that  it  should  have  been  accounted 
a  thing  to  be  reckoned  with  in  a  general  plan  for  dealing 
with  sinners.  The  fact  that  man,  rather  than  God,  is 
represented  to  be  reconciled  does  not  prove  that  it  was 
considered  a  matter   of  indifference  to    God   how   He 

1  Rom.  i.  18,  iii.  5,  v.  9 ;  Eph.  v.  6. 


230  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

should  set  to  work  to  bridge  over  the  chasm  between 
Himself  and  the  offending  race.  This  representation 
naturally  followed  from  the  emphasis  which,  in  the  mind 
of  the  apostle,  was  placed  upon  the  truth  that  it  is  God 
who  takes  the  initiative  in  the  scheme  of  reconciliation. 
There  is  no  denial  here  of  the  divine  recoil  against  sin. 
God  is  the  reconciler  as  instituting  the  whole  scheme  of 
reconciliation  ;  it  may  be  also  that  He  is  viewed  as  rec- 
onciled in  the  sense  that  the  scheme  of  reconciliation 
is  so  constituted  as  to  express  His  judgment  against  sin, 
and  thus  to  take  away  the  barrier  to  the  fullest  expres- 
sion of  His  grace  toward  sinners.  In  briefer  terms,  He 
may  be  viewed  as  satisfying  the  demands  of  His  right- 
eousness through  the  special  method  of  His  grace. 

Proceeding  a  step  further,  we  note  that  Paul  indicates 
quite  clearly  his  conviction  that  the  work  of  Christ  was 
actually  a  tribute  to  the  wrath  or  righteousness  side  of 
the  divine  nature,  and  that  there  was  real  occasion  for 
such  a  tribute  in  connection  with  a  dispensation  of  meas- 
ureless grace.  In  Rom.  iii.  25  he  speaks  of  Christ  as 
being  in  His  death  a  propitiation  or  means  of  propitia- 
tion;  and  the  context  indicates  that  the 'motive  for  the 
propitiation  was  the  practical  necessity  of  showing  forth 
the  righteousness  of  God,  as  against  an  appearance  of 
laxity  or  indulgence  toward  sin.^     Faith  is  associated 

1  This  much  of  meaning  inheres  in  the  passage  even  though  the 
term  IXaaTrjpiOv  be  rendered  "  mercy-seat  "  rather  than  "  propitiation." 
In  the  given  context  a  blood-stained  mercy-seat  must  be  regarded  as 
symboUcally  declarative  of  the  idea  of  atonement  or  propitiation.  As 
respects  choice  between  the  two  renderings,  reference  to  the  terminology 
of  the  Septuagint  version  of  the  Old  Testament  and  to  patristic  inter- 
pretation would  dictate  a  preference  for  the  expression  "mercy-seat." 


^:: 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  231 

with  the  propitiation  as  the  indispensable  instrument  for 
personal  realization  of  the  benefit  for  which  it  provides. 
The  propitiation    itself   is  contemplated   as  essentially 
consummated  once  for  all  by  the  death  of  the  sinless 
Redeemer.     In  virtue    of    it    God   appears  as  just,  or 
supremely  regardful  of  the  claims  of  righteousness,  while 
yet  He  graciously  pardons  him  that  hath  faith  in  Jesus. 
In  various  connections  the  apostle  uses  language  which 
is  substantially  equivalent,  in  its  suggestion  of  an  objec- 
tive aspect  of  atonement,  to  the  description  of  Christ's 
work  as  a  means  of  propitiation.     He  gives  to  Christ's 
death  the  value  of  an  offset  to  the  condemnatory  sen- 
tence of  the  law,  declaring  that  Christ  redeemed  us  from 
the  curse  of  the  law,  having  become  a  curse  for  us.^    He 
says  similarly  that  God  made  Him  who  knew  no  sm  to 
be  sin  on  our  behalf.^     He  speaks  of  reconciliation  in 
the  past  tense,  or  as  something  accomplished  by  the 
death  of  Christ  while  we  were  yet  enemies  of  God  —  a 
I  form  of  expression  which  suggests  that  he  considered 
'the  death  of  Christ  as  the  basis  of  reconciliation,  the 

On  the  other  hand,  the  sudden  intrusion  of  an  image  which  affords  no 
real  explanation  of  the  foregoing  statement,  and  which  involves  the 
awkward  indentification  of  Christ  with  the  lid  of  an  ark  on  which  sacri- 
ficial blood  was  sprinkled  rather  than  with  the  sacrifice  itself,  is  some- 
..thing  which  one  may  justly  hesitate  to  attribute  to  the  apostle.  It  is 
not  a  matter  for  surprise,  therefore,  to  find  a  considerable  tendency  in 
recent  exegesis  t-o  accept  "  propitiation  "  or  "  propitiatory  "  as  the  proper 
translation  of  lX.a(XTrjpLOV.  While  Olshausen,  Philippi,  Tholuck,  Lange, 
Cremer,  Ritschl,  Gifford  and  Terry  have  advocated  the  superior  claim 
of  the  term  "mercy-seat,"  Meyer,  Lipsius,  Godet,  Sanday,  Denney, 
Stevens,  Garvie,  Cone  and  others  have  justified  the  rendering  which 
appears  in  our  standard  English  versions. 

iGaLiiL  13.  2  2  Cor.  v.  21. 


232  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ground  of  the  gracious  economy  in  which  forgiveness  of 
sins  is  assured.^  A  hke  implication  is  contained  in  the 
statement  that  through  one  act  of  righteousness  the  free 
gift  came  upon  all  men  to  justification  of  life.^  This 
act  of  righteousness,  if  not  to  be  identified  with  Christ's 
obedience  unto  death  must  still  be  regarded,  according 
to  the  analogy  of  Paul's  teaching  in  Rom.  iii.  24-26,  as 
based  upon  the  same,  and  is  accordingly  indicative  of  the 
idea  that  the  general  dispensation  of  grace  is  founded  in 
Christ's  death.  A  hint  in  the  same  order  is  contained 
in  this  collocation  of  question  and  answer,  **  Who  is  he 
that  condemneth  ?  It  is  Christ  that  died."  ^  The  words 
perhaps  do  not  necessarily  point  to  the  death  of  Christ 
as  an  objective  basis  of  acquittal,  but  in  the  light  of 
preceding  statements  in  the  same  epistle  they  are  very 
naturally  taken  in  that  sense.  It  is  likewise  permissible 
to  put  in  evidence  expressions  to  the  effect  that  Christ 
died  for  our  sins,*  or  that  we  are  justified  by  His  blood.^ 
In  the  dialect  of  the  age  such  expressions  were  asso- 
ciated with  sacrificial  offerings  for  the  removing  of  sins.^ 
Finally  the  death  of  Christ  seems  to  be  set  forth  as  the 
basis  of  the  universal  offer  and  dispensation  of  pardon 
in  the  strong  words,  "  In  whom  we  have  our  redemption 
through  His  blood,  the  forgiveness  of  our  trespasses." '' 

The  marked  antithesis  which  the  apostle  asserts  be- 
tween Christ,  as  the  sinless  Redeemer,  and  all  men  as 
sinners,  and  the  vital  sense  which  he  manifests  of  un- 


1  Rom. 

V.   ID. 

2  Rom.  V.  18. 

*  Rom.  viii. 

34- 

4  I  Cor 

•  XV.  3. 

fi  Rom.  V.  9. 

6  See  I 

Cor.  V. 

7; 

Eph. 

V.  2;  Heb.  V.  I, 

vii. 

27> 

ix.  7,  12. 

7  Eph.  : 

i.  7. 

THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  233 

qualified  obligation  to  His  saving  office,  are  a  sufficient 
guaranty  that  he  did  not  think  of  himself,  or  of  any 
other,  as  a  real  partner  in  Christ's  work  of  atonement. 
When,  therefore,  he  speaks  of  filling  up  that  which  is 
lacking  of  the  afflictions  of  Christ  \  it  cannot  be  his  design 
to  intimate  that  he  expects  to  supplement  the  propitia- 
tory or  atoning  work  of  the  Saviour  —  a  work  which  in 
fact  is  not  described  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament  by 
the  term  employed  here  {6\Lyjn<;).  Two  interpretations 
may  claim  consideration.  It  is  possible  that  the  apostle 
in  this  connection  spoke  in  a  general  way  of  the  afflictions 
of  Christ  as  endured  for  the  kingdom,  without  reference 
to  their  atoning  virtue,  and  from  this  point  of  view  con- 
sidered them  as  properly  followed  up  in  the  suffering  of 
Christians  for  the  kingdom.  As  Lightfoot  notes,  suf- 
ferings may  be  either  satisfactorial  or  aedificatorial,  hav- 
ing an  efficacy  to  found  a  gracious  economy,  or  serving 
to  build  up  the  Church,  and  in  sufferings  of  the  latter 
kind  any  faithful  Christian  may  share.  Again  it  is  pos- 
sible that  Paul  spoke  from  the  standpoint  of  a  very  vivid 
conception  of  mystical  union  with  the  Redeemer,  and 
deemed  it  admissible  to  designate  as  Christ's  afflictions 
those  which  His  members  are  called  upon  to  endure  in  His 
name  and  for  His  sake.  This  interpretation  has  the  ad- 
vantage of  superior  simplicity,  and  is  withal  quite  congenial 
to  the  Pauline  way  of  thinking.  ^ 

As  was  stated,  the  objective  point  of  view  by  no  means 
absorbed  the  whole  attention  of  the  apostle.  If  he  re- 
garded Christ,  on  the  one  hand,  as  the  atoning  Redeemer 

1  Col.  i.  24. 

2  Compare  Peake,  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  III.  514,  515. 


234       NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

upon  whose  work  of  holy  obedience  and  self-sacrifice 
the  universal  economy  of  grace  rests,  he  regarded  Him 
on  the  other  hand  as  an  actual  power  of  life  in  the  midst 
of  humanity.  By  His  great  deed  of  love  He  draws  men 
into  a  faith  and  a  fellowship  which  are  profoundly  effica- 
cious to  renovate  character.  He  that  truly  believes  upon 
Him  can  be  said  to  be  crucified  with  Him,  and  with  Him 
to  be  risen  from  the  dead.  ^  The  law  of  the  Spirit  of 
Life  in  Him  makes  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death .^ 
His  cross  is  the  symbol  of  a  virtue  which  extirpates  the 
old  selfish  and  worldly  inclination,  and  transports  a  man 
into  a  new  world  of  love  and  service.^  The  believer  is  in 
Christ.  There  is,  so  to  speak,  an  effective  contact,  a 
mystical  union,  between  him  and  the  life-giving  person- 
ality of  his  Lord.* 

It  is  congruous  with  this  point  of  view  that  Paul  gives 
to  the  resurrection  of  Christ  a  close  association  with  His 
saving  office.^  His  resurrection  serves  to  make  practi- 
cally effective  the  divine  lesson  contained  in  His  death. 
It  shows  that  His  death  was  not  the  death  of  a  sinner 
but  of  a  Saviour.  It  presents  Him  also  as  victorious 
over  the  last  enemy.  Accordingly  it  stimulates  to  faith 
in  Him  as  an  adequate  source  of  life  for  the  present  and 
the  future.  Only  the  risen  Christ,  victorious  over  death, 
Himself  an  heir  of  incorruption,  can  invite  to  faith  in  His 
vocation  to  be  a  creative  and  quickening  power  in  men 
and  a  bearer  to  them  of  eternal  life. 

1  Rom.  vi.5-9.  2  Rom.  viii.  2. 

8 Gal.  ii.  20,  vi.  14;  2  Cor.  v.  15,  17. 

*Rom.  viii.  i;  i  Cor.i.  30;  2  Cor.  xiii.  5;  Eph.  ii.  7,  iii.  17,  iv.  15,  16; 
Col.  iii.  3,  4. 

6  Rom.  iv.  25;  I  Cor.  xv.  14;  Phil.  iii.  10. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  235 

Very  different  degrees  of  appreciation  have  been 
awarded,  and  are  likely  still  to  be  awarded,  to  these  two 
sides  of  Christ's  work.  The  fact  which  biblical  theology 
has  to  recognize  is  that  the  two  aspects  are  closely  asso- 
ciated together  in  the  Pauline  exposition  of  the  office  of 
the  Redeemer. 

The  apostle,  it  may  be  noticed,  while  evidently  pene- 
trated most  deeply  with  the  sense  of  the  importance  of 
Christ's  death  in  the  economy  of  grace,  has  not  occupied 
much  space  in  explaining  the  inestimable  value  which  he 
attached  thereto.  He  has  made  it  clear,  however,  that 
he  considered  Christ's  delivery  of  Himself  to  the  ordeal 
of  the  cross,  to  have  been  a  great  ethical  deed,  and  has 
given  reason  for  believing  that  he  esteemed  the  ethical 
quality  of  the  deed  indispensable  to  its  value.  This  ap- 
pears in  the  antithesis  which  he  draws  between  the  dis- 
obedient Adam  and  the  obedient  Christ.  ^  In  more 
succinct  terms  the  same  conviction  is  intimated  in  the 
words  which  picture  the  humbled  Son  of  God  as  "becom- 
ing obedient  even  unto  death,  yea,  the  death  of  the 
cross. "  2  Herein  a  basis  is  afforded  for  a  close  association 
between  the  death  and  the  life,  since  the  obedience 
which  came  to  a  culminating  expression  in  the  cross  ran 
through  the  whole  career  of  the  incarnated  Redeemer. 

Vni. — Justification  and  Regeneration. 

The  juxtaposition  of  these  two  terms  is  not  inappropri- 
ate. As  justice  cannot  be  done  to  Paul's  theory  of  the 
reconciling  work  of  Christ  without  taking  account  of  two 

iRom.  V.  12-21.  2phil.  ii.  8. 


236  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

different  but  closely  associated  aspects,  so  is  it  with  re- 
spect to  his  theory  of  the  appropriation  of  salvation  by 
the  individual.  It  has  an  objective  aspect,  and  in  that 
view  is  justification.  It  has  also,  distinguishable  in 
thought,  but  not  separable  in  fact,  a  subjective  aspect, 
and  from  that  standpoint  may  be  styled  regeneration. ) 

The  weight  of  Protestant  scholarship  is  very  distinctly 
on  the  side  of  the  conclusion  that  Paul  used  the  term 
justification  in  the  objective,  judicial  sense,  making  it  to 
denote  the  pardon  of  its  subject,  or  his  induction  into  an 
approved  standing  before  God,  rather  than  the  fact  of 
his  being  made  just  or  righteous  by  an  inner  transforma- 
tion.^ v:  In  favor  of  this  consensus  of  interpretation  may 
be  cited  in  the  first  place  the  meaning  which  antecedent 
and  contemporary  Jewish  usage  assigned  to  the  Greek 
word  (SL/catovv)  which  is  rendered  to  "justify."  The 
word  occurs  about  forty-five  times  in  the  Septuagint,  and 
almost  invariably,  if  not  quite  so,  in  the  objective  or  judi- 
cial sense.  It  is  used  in  the  like  sense  in  the  Pseudepi- 
graphic  writings,  such  as  the  Psalms  of  Solomon,  Fourth 
Ezra,  and  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch.^  -^^n  the  second 
place  reference  may  be  made  to  the  statement  of  Paul 
respecting  the  impossibility  of  justification  by  the  works 
of  the  law.  This  impossibility  was  evidently  affirmed  by 
him  on  the  ground  that  the  law  will  inevitably  condemn 
a  man  because  of  his  imperfect  fulfillment  of  its  precepts. 
The  failure  of  the  legal  method  to  bring  justification  is 

1  Weiss,  Holtzmann,  Beyschlag,  Pfleiderer,  Lipsius,  F.  Nitzsch,  Kaf- 
tan, Meyer,  Godet,  Sanday,  Bruce,  Stevens,  and  Cone  are  a  few  of  the 
many  who  so  interpret. 

2  Sanday,  Comm.  on  Romans,  p.  31. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  237 

thus  identified  with  its  inability  to  remove  the  condemna- 
tion or  curse  of  the  law.i     But  if  lack  of  justification  is 
made  synonymous  with  condemnation,  it  is  quite  obvious 
that   justification  is  designed   to  express  an  approving 
sentence.'   A  third  evidence  in  favor  of   the  objective 
signification  is  found  in  sentences  which  place  justifica- 
tion in  direct  contrast  with  condemnation.     The  follow- 
ing will  serve  as  examples  :  "  Not  as  through  one  that 
sinned,  so  also  is  the  free  gift;  for  the  judgment  came 
of  one  unto  condemnation,  but  the  free  gift  came  of 
many  trespasses  unto  justification."  ^     <<Who  shall  lay 
anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?     It  is  God  that 
justifieth;  who  is  he  that  shall  condemn .?  "3>,  Still  an- 
other very  clear  indication  that  Paul  attached  the  objec- 
tive meaning  to  justification  is  contained  in  his  use  of  the 
term  *'  reckon  "  or  "  impute  "  (XoyLt^o/xat)  in  connections 
where  justification  was   the   subject    under    discussion. 
Here   belongs  a  large   part    of   the   fourth   chapter  of 
Romans.     The    case    of    Abraham    is    treated    by   the 
apostle  as  a  typical  case.     He  sees  in  it  a  foreshadowing 
of   the  gospel   plan  of   justification.     He   thus   plainly 
evinces  that  in  his  thought  the  justification  to  which  he 
is  pointing  out  the  way  is  identified  with  the  approving 
sentence  of  God. 

The  connection  suggests  a  reference  to  Paul's  pecul- 
iar use  of  the  phrase  "the  righteousness  of  God" 
{hKaioavvT)  Oeov).  When  he  speaks  of  this  righteous- 
ness as  something  given  to  man  in  response  to  his  faith 
he  seems  to  treat  it  as  the  equivalent  of  justification.* 

1  Compare  Rom.  iii.  20  and  Gal.  ii.  16  with  Gal.  iii.  10,  11. 

2  Rom.  V.  16.  3  Rom.  viii.  33,  34. 
*  See  Rom.  i.  17,  iii.  21,  22,  x.  3 ;  2  Cor.  v.  21. 


238  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

In  other  words,  it  denotes  that  approved  standing  with 
God  which  cannot  be  gained  in  the  way  of  legal  perform- 
ance. It  is  God's  righteousness  in  the  sense  that  He  is 
its  gracious  author,  the  source  whence  comes  the  sentence 
which  takes  a  man  out  from  a  state  of  condemnation  and 
consequent  spiritual  deprivation.  It  is  made  man's  right- 
eousness in  the  sense  that  by  his  faith  he  is  set  in  the 
relation  of  an  approved  child  of  God,  and  given  a  title  to 
all  the  benefits  which  belong  with  that  relation. 

Adoption  is  a  term  which  is  also  closely  associated 
with  justification  in  its  objective  significance.  It  denotes 
induction  into  the  relation  of  sonship.^  A  subjective 
counterpart  belongs  undoubtedly  with  the  relation.  But 
the  instituting  of  the  relation  is  as  distinctly  an  objective 
transaction  as  is  justification.  In  fact  the  one  transac- 
tion differs  in  conception  but  slightly  from  the  other. 
For  God  to  grant  an  approving  sentence  to  one  whose 
normal  and  designed  place  is  that  of  a  son  in  His  house- 
hold, is  practically  equivalent  to  a  distinct  instatement 
in  the  relation  of  sonship.  According  to  the  report  of 
Paul's  speech  at  Athens,  he  acknowledged  that  in  a  cer- 
tain sense  men  are  by  nature  children  of  God.^  But  in 
his  epistles  he  regards  the  filial  relation  as  practically 
denied  by  the  alienation  of  men  from  God,  and  treating 
of  them  as  candidates  for  a  spiritual  order  of  life  he 
naturally  contemplates  them  as  subjects  for  induction 
into  sonship. 

While  Paul  gave  to  the  salvation  of  the  individual  this 
objective  aspect,  there  is  not  the  slightest  indication  that 
he  thought  of  it  as  separable  in  fact  from  that  inner  ex- 

l  Gal.  iv.  5 ;  Eph.  i.  5.  «  Acts  xvii.  28,  29. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  239 

perience  of  grace  which  initiates  and  sustains  the  regen- 
erate character.  The  antinomian  suggestion  that  divine 
grace  may  redound  to  the  justification  of  a  man  apart 
from  personal  reformation  of  hfe  he  repudiates  with  the 
utmost  vigor.  To  believe  upon  Christ  unto  justification 
is  equivalent  in  his  view  to  a  decisive  renunciation  of  sin. 
"We  who  died  to  sin,"  he  exclaims,  *'how  shall  we  any 
longer  live  therein.?  Our  old  man  was  crucified  with 
Christ  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  done  away,  that  so 
we  should  be  no  longer  in  bondage  to  sin."  ^  He  repre- 
sents release  from  condemnation  and  inward  renewal  to 
be  synchronous  events.  The  one  who  attains  unto  the 
former  is  made  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death  by  the 
law  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  if  any  man 
hath  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  His.^ 

The  condition  of  justification,  and,  by  reason  of  intrin- 
sic connection,  of  regeneration  also,  is  commonly  repre- 
sented by  Paul  to  be  simply  faith.  The  combination  of 
repentance  with  faith,  which  appears  in  the  Synoptical 
Gospels,  and  also  the  explicit  emphasis  of  those  Gospels 
upon  confession  of  Christ,  are  not  characteristic  of  the 
recorded  teachings  of  the  apostle.  There  is  indeed  a 
passing  reference  both  to  the  one  and  the  other .^  But 
in  Paul's  exposition  of  the  conditions  of  attaining  to  sal- 
vation a  well-nigh  exclusive  stress  is  placed  upon  faith. 
He  declares  it  distinctive  of  the  gospel  that  therein  is 
revealed  a  righteousness  of  God  by  faith  unto  faith.* 
He  represents  faith  to  be  the  means  of  giving  practical 
effect  to  the  propitiation  in  the  blood  of  Christ.^     He 

1  Rom.  vi.  2,  6.  2  Rom.  viii.  1,2;  Col.  iii.  3,  9,  10. 

«  2  Cor.  vii.  10;  Rom.  x.  10.         *  Rom.  i.  17.         ^  Rom.  iii.  25. 


240  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

makes  faith  the  immediate  condition  of  spiritual  sonship. 
**  Ye  are  all  sons  of  God,  through  faith,  in  Jesus  Christ."^ 
In  repeated  instances  he  bases  justification  upon  the  sole 
condition  of  faith.^  Moreover,  he  views  faith  as  being 
continuously  a  principle  of  the  religious  life.^ 

The  apostle  who  conditioned  so  much  upon  faith  could 
not,  in  all  likelihood,  have  given  it  a  superficial  meaning. 
The  term  signified  to  him  much  more  than  mere  intel- 
lectual assent.  He  has  indicated  that  he  thought  of 
faith  as  issuing  from  the  centre  of  man's  personality  and 
expressing  his  volitional  and  affectional  nature,  in  that 
he  says  with  the  heart  man  believeth  unto  righteousness.* 
A  like  implication  belongs  with  the  description  of  the 
specifically  Christian  principle  as  a  faith  that  works  by 
love.^  To  the  same  effect  also  is  the  representation  that 
faith  is  a  means  of  vital  union  with  Christ,  so  uniting  its 
subject  to  Him  that  it  becomes  appropriate  to  speak  of 
a  mutual  indwelling.^  In  short,  it  is  manifest  that  the 
faith  which  Paul  exalts  as  the  condition  of  salvation 
signifies  nothing  less  than  a  thorough  self -committal  to 
God  in  Christ.  It  stands  for  this  great  ethical  deed, 
and  so  contains  implicitly  not  a  little  that  might  be 
designated  by  other  names.  By  virtue  of  necessary 
connections  thorough  self -committal  to  God  in  Christ 
involves  a  penitent  forsaking  of  sin,  a  loyal  confession  of 
Christ,  and  a  sincere  espousal  of  the  path  of  obedience 
to  the  known  will  of  God. 

1  Gal.  iii.  26. 

2  Rom.  iii.  22,  26,  28,  iv.  22-25,  v.  i,  2  ;  Gal.  ii.  16,  iii.  ii,  12.  See 
also  Eph.  ii.  8 ;   Phil.  iii.  9. 

3  Gal.  ii.  20;  2  Cor.  v.  7.  *  Rom.  x.  10. 

^Gal.  V.  6.  *  Eph.  iii.  17  ;  Gal.  ii.  20,  iii.  26-28. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY 


241 


Paul  did  not  suppose  that  faith  saves  in  its  own  virtue 
as  a  work  or  personal  performance.  The  antithesis  which 
he  makes  between  salvation  by  works  and  salvation  by 
the  free  gift  of  God  in  Christ  emphatically  negatives  a 
supposition  of  that  sort.  The  method  of  faith,  he  dis- 
tinctly affirms,  is  the  method  according  to  grace.^  ,  He 
conceives,  therefore,  of  faith  as  the  graciously  appointed 
condition  of  salvation  rather  than  its  meritorious  ground. 
It  is  not  necessary,  however,  to  imagine  that  he  rated  it 
as  a  mere  indifferent  instrument,  serving  by  appointment 
a  useful  purpose,  but  having  no  ethical  worth  in  itself. 
Without  doubt  he  considered  it  to  be  intrinsically  a  noble 
and  ennobling  activity  of  the  human  spirit,  and  he  has 
indicated  as  much  by  placing  it  alongside  of  hope  and 
love  among  the  things  that  have  abiding  worth. 2 

In  express  emphasis  upon  the  office  of  faith  Paul  went 
beyond  all  other  New  Testament  writers.  He  was  not, 
however,  in  this  matter  a  fabricator  of  strange  doctrine. 
In  more  poetic  and  popular  form  Christ  taught  the  great 
lesson  that  faith,  in  the  sense  of  trustful  self-committal, 
is  the  channel  of  the  divine  mercy  and  of  all  spiritual 
bounty.  Nor  is  it  evident  that  true  religion  can  ration- 
ally assign  any  lesser  office  to  faith.  Religion  in  its 
highest  and  purest  form  is  a  religion  of  sonship.  As 
such  it  must  put  faith,  or  filial  self-committal  to  God,  in 
the  front  rank  of  requirement  and  privilege. 

This  remark  naturally  directs  attention  to  the  fact  that 
in  Paul's  view  the  faith  which  justifies  normally  issues. 
into  a  filial  consciousness.  To  be  a  living  Christian  and 
to  have  a  filial  consciousness  were  evidently  closely  re- 

1  Rom.  iv.  16.  2  I  Cor.  xiii.  13. 


242  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

lated,  if  not  identical,  ideas  in  his  mind.  To  the  brethren 
at  Rome  he  writes,  "  Ye  received  not  the  spirit  of  bond- 
age again  unto  fear ;  but  ye  received  the  spirit  of  adop- 
tion, whereby  we  cry,  Abba,  Father.  The  Spirit  Him- 
self beareth  witness  with  our  spirit,  that  we  are  the 
children  of  God."  ^  The  witness  with,  as  specified  here, 
must  evidently  be  at  the  same  time  a  witness  to  the 
human  spirit,  since  no  third  party  is  contemplated.  The 
meaning  is  that  the  activity  of  the  Divine  Spirit  and  the 
accordant  or  responsive  movement  of  the  Christian's  own 
spirit  result  in  a  lively  sense  of  a  filial  standing.  As  to 
the  mode  of  the  former  there  is  no  definite  specification. 
The  theory  of  immediate  communication  has  its  advo- 
cates, but  the  apostle's  language  does  not  exclude  the 
supposition  that  the  Holy  Spirit  works  dynamically  and 
effects  assurance  mediately,  that  is,  by  enkindling  and 
sustaining  the  filial  temper  which  cannot  well  refrain 
from  calling  unto  God  as  Father. 

In  a  preceding  paragraph  reasons  were  stated  for  the 
conclusion  that  certain  sentences  of  Paul,  which  give 
emphatic  expression  to  the  idea  of  divine  sovereignty, 
were  not  designed  to  teach  that  men  are  arbitrarily  in- 
ducted into  the  kingdom  or  excluded  therefrom.  It  is 
proper  to  notice  here  that  there  are  representations  in 
the  Pauline  epistles  which  bear  strongly  against  a  partic- 
ularistic theory,  and  invite  to  the  belief  that  the  high 
privilege  of  sonship  is  truly  set  before  every  man.  Such 
is  the  antithesis  which  is  drawn  between  Adam  and 
Christ  in  the  fifth  chapter  of  Romans.  Who  can  read 
this  chapter  without  discovering  that  the  apostle  meant 

1  Rom.  viii.  15,  16.     Compare  Gal.  iv.  6. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  243 

to  describe  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ  as  matching,  or 
overmatching,  the  evil  consequences  of  Adam's  fault  ? 
In  fact  the  free  gift  is  described  as  being  for  as  many 
as  are  touched  by  the  blight  and  condemnation.  Again, 
in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  chapters  of  the  same  epistle, 
as  has  been  noticed  already,  God  is  represented  to  so 
manipulate  the  course  of  history  as  shall  conduce  to  the 
ingathering  of  the  greatest  possible  number  of  both  Jews 
and  Gentiles.  Furthermore,  it  is  to  be  observed  that 
Paul  does  not  hesitate  to  speak  of  Christ  as  having  died 
for  all,  or  to  name  the  world  as  the  object  of  the  scheme 
of  reconciliation.^  It  is  not  a  little  significant,  too,  that 
in  spite  of  his  luminous  confidence  as  to  his  standing 
before  God  he  speaks  of  the  necessity  of  practising  self- 
discipline,  lest  he  himself  should  be  rejected  after  having 
preached  to  others.^  That  does  not  look  as  if  he  con- 
ceived of  personal  destiny  as  fixed  by  an  unconditional 
decree. 

IX.  —  The  Unfoldment  and  Manifestation  of  the 
New  Life. 

In  setting  forth  the  ideal  of  the  Christian  life  Paul 
was  far  from  contenting  himself  with  drawing  a  general 
outline.  He  speaks  indeed  of  sanctification,  but  he 
speaks  far  more  frequently  of  the  several  elements  of  a 
rounded  character.  It  is  quite  plain  that  he  never 
imagined  that  any  one  could  properly  be  labelled  as 
entirely  sanctified,  or  perfected  religiously,  who  might 
still  be  lacking  in  love,  meekness,  patience,  gentleness 

1  2  Cor,  V.  14,  19.  2  I  Cor.  ix.  27. 


244  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

or  any  other  Christian  virtue.  His  ideal  was  inclusive 
of  positive  spiritual  health  and  fullness,  as  well  as  exclu- 
sive of  perversities  and  impotences.  To  reach  it  was 
not  by  any  means,  in  his  view,  a  mere  matter  of  washing 
away  blots  and  stains.  Judging  from  references  to  his 
own  struggle  and  endeavor,^  we  may  conclude  that  he 
had  very  slight  confidence  in  the  ability  of  any  one  to 
reach  the  goal  by  a  sudden  spring. 

A  large  place  in  Paul's  ideal  of  Christian  character  is 
given  to  love.  He  regards  it  as  the  flower  of  faith,  the 
consummation  of  the  spiritual  excellence  to  which  faith 
opens  up  the  way.  Faith  is  its  antecedent,  inasmuch 
as  faith  initiates  the  fellowship  in  which  love  grows. 
But  here  the  child  may  be  regarded  as  surpassing  the 
parent.  Not  only  does  the  apostle  distinctly  award  to 
love  the  primacy  in  the  immortal  epitome  of  ethical 
religion  contained  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  First 
Corinthians ;  he  often  commends  it  as  the  chief  spiritual 
value.  He  teaches  the  Romans  that  love,  as  incapable 
of  working  ill,  is  the  fulfillment  of  the  law.^  He  enforces 
the  obligation  of  love  in  his  address  to  the  Ephesians  by 
appealing  to  the  divine  illustration  of  its  beauty  and 
efficacy  given  in  Christ,  and  prays  that  they  may  be 
rooted  and  grounded  in  love.^  He  exhorts  the  Colos- 
sians  to  put  on,  above  all  things,  love  which  is  the  bond 
of  perfectness.*  He  asks  for  the  Thessalonians  that  the 
Lord  would  make  them  to  increase  and  abound  in  love 
one  toward  another,  and  toward  all  men ;  and  while  he 
acknowledges  their  praiseworthy  exhibition  of  brotherly 

1  I  Cor.  ix.  27;  Phil.  iii.  12,  14.  »  Eph.  v.  i,  2,  iii.  17. 

2  Rom.  xiii.  9,  10.  *  Col.  iii.  14. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  245 

affection,  he  urges  them  to  abound  in  love  more  and 
more.^ 

In  the  apostle's  eulogy  of  love  he  contrasts  it  not  only 
with  all  gifts  of  pov^rer,  but  also  with  knowledge,  quite  to 
the  disparagement  of  the  relative  worth  of  the  latter. 
Our  present  knowledge,  he  conceives,  is  so  partial  and 
fragmentary,  that  it  will  pass  away  before  the  higher 
disclosures  of  the  future,  much  as  the  child's  stock  of 
ideas  gives  place  to  the  maturer  thoughts  of  manhood.^ 
Also  in  relation  to  the  conditions  of  present  enlighten- 
ment he  emphasizes  the  incompetency  of  worldly  wisdom 
to  take  the  place  of  a  truly  religious  disposition.^  Never- 
theless, the  apostle  has  no  thought  of  rating  knowledge 
at  a  low  figure.  His  strictures  are  aimed  against  the 
assignment  to  it  of  inappropriate  offices.  He  includes 
growth  in  knowledge  in  the  Christian  ideal.  Thus  he 
prays  for  the  Philippians  that  their  love  may  abound  in 
knowledge  and  all  discernment.*  In  like  manner  he 
prays  for  the  Colossians  that  they  may  be  filled  with  the 
knowledge  of  God's  will  in  all  spiritual  wisdom  and 
understanding,  and  reminds  them  that  they  have  put  on 
the  new  man,  which  is  being  renewed  unto  knowledge 
after  the  image  of  Him  that  created  him.^  For  the 
Ephesians  also  he  makes  request  of  God  that  He  would 
give  unto  them  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  revelation  in 
the  knowledge  of  Him.^  He  invites  them,  moreover, 
to  a  high  estimate  of  the  worth  of  knowledge  when  he 
describes  the  aim  of  all  church  instrumentalities  to  be 
"  the  building  up  of  the  body  of  Christ,  till  we  all  attain 

1  I  Thess.  iii.  12,  iv.  9,  10.     ^i  Cor.xiii.  8-12.     ^  i  Cor.  i.  17-25,  iL 
*  Phil.  i.  9.  6  Col.  i.  9,  10,  iii.  9,  10.  ®  Eph.  i.  17. 


246  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

unto  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  God,  unto  a  full-grown  man,  unto  the  measure  of 
the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ :  that  we  may  be  no 
longer  children,  tossed  to  and  fro  and  carried  about  with 
every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  sleight  of  men,  in  crafti- 
ness, after  the  wiles  of  error ;  but  speaking  the  truth  in 
love,  may  grow  up  in  all  things  into  Him,  which  is  the 
head  even  Christ,"  ^  Doubtless  the  apostle  might  have 
awarded  a  larger  consideration  to  earthly  science  as 
likely  in  the  long  run  to  favor  the  maintenance  of  sound 
religious  conceptions.  But  that  is  a  point  of  view  with 
which  he  does  not  deal.  He  contemplates  knowledge 
only  in  its  more  immediate  and  evident  connection  with 
religious  interests.  He  manifestly  rates  it  highly  where 
it  stands  in  congenial  relations  with  faith  and  love. 

A  noticeable  feature  in  Paul's  Christian  ideal  is  the 
combination  which  it  exhibits  of  the  gentler  virtues  with 
the  more  heroic.  The  commendation  of  patience,  forbear- 
ance, sympathy,  long-suffering,  gentleness,  and  the  spirit 
of  forgiveness  occupies  no  inconsiderable  portion  of  his 
epistles. 2 

Less  space  is  given  to  the  inculcation  of  manful  energy, 
courage,  and  devotion  ;  but  enough  is  said  in  their  behalf 
to  show  that  the  apostle  regarded  tender  considerateness 
and  militant  force  to  be  perfectly  compatible  attributes 
of  the  Christian  disciple.  The  same  epistle  which  re- 
cords the  exhortation  to  be  tender-hearted  and  forgiving, 
records  also  the  exhortation  to  be  strong  in  the  Lord,  and 

1  Eph.  iv.  12-15. 

2  Rom.  xii.  10-21,  xiv.  13-20,  xv.  1-3;  2  Cor.  vi.  6;  Gai.  v.  22,  23; 
Eph.  iv.  1-3,31,  32;  Phil.  iv.  5;  Col.  i.  11,  iii.  12,  13;  i  Thess.v.  14. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  247 

to  Stand  against  principalities  and  powers  clad  in  the 
whole  armor  of  God.^  Within  the  limits  of  a  couple  of 
sentences  are  given  these  injunctions  :  **  Let  all  that  ye 
do  be  done  in  love  " ;  "  stand  fast  in  the  faith,  quit  you 
like  men,  be  strong."  2  The  apostle,  in  short,  repro- 
duces in  the  form  of  precepts  the  ideal  which  Christ  ex- 
hibited in  the  form  of  a  real  life  among  men.  Beyond 
question  the  image  of  the  historical  Christ  was  often  in 
his  mind  as  he  wrote  to  his  converts  such  instructions  as 
might  assist  them  to  attain  unto  "a  full  grown  man." 

The  judgment  has  been  expressed  in  a  few  instances 
that  the  Pauline  theology  makes  no  provision  for  progres- 
sive sanctification,  inasmuch  as  it  rates  the  experience  in 
justification  and  regeneration  as  all-transforming,  a  trans- 
ference into  a  state  of  essential  perfection.  One  can 
only  wonder  where  this  eccentric  criticism  obtained  its 
petty  inch  rule  for  measuring  the  teaching  of  Paul. 
Doubtless  the  apostle,  in  the  transition  epoch  in  which  he 
wrought,  had  an  urgent  call  to  clarify  the  conditions  of 
entering  the  Christian  life,  and  devoted  a  very  consider- 
able part  of  his  discourse  to  this  topic.  Doubtless  also 
he  profoundly  accentuated  the  transformation  which  re- 
sults to  the  believing  soul  from  earnest  trustful  self  com- 
mittal to  God  as  revealed  in  Christ,  and  vigorously  set 
forth  the  conclusion  that  such  a  soul  should  reckon  itself 
entirely  dead  unto  sin.  But  what  less  could  he  do  in 
justice  to  the  theme  }  That  he  painted  in  glowing  terms 
the  ideal  is  no  sort  of  token  that  he  ignored  the  discrep- 
ancy between  the  actual  and  the  ideal.  Who  can  read 
his    epistles,  and    not  perceive  that  he  saw  with  open 

1  Eph.  iv,  32,  vi,  10-17.  ^  I  Co'^-  ^-  ^3>  ^4- 


248  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

eyes  the  shortcomings  of  contemporary  Christians  ?  Who 
can  take  even  a  casual  glance  at  his  messages  to  his 
disciples,  and  not  discover  that  his  heart  was  filled  with 
a  great  and  ceaseless  anxiety  that  all  who  had  received 
the  saving  word  from  him  might  be  so  transformed  by 
the  renewing  of  their  mind  as  to  prove  the  perfect  will 
of  God,  might  follow  after  love  until  they  should  be 
rooted  and  grounded  therein,  might  walk  in  the  Spirit 
until  they  should  exemplify  all  His  fruits,  might  attain 
unto  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fullness  of  Christ, 
might  be  sanctified  wholly  ?  Indeed,  one  who  runs  may 
read  the  conviction  of  the  apostle  that  a  goal  of  spiritual 
attainment  lies  distinctly  ahead  of  the  converted  man,  so 
that  he  has  abundant  need  to  press  forward.  But,  it  is 
alleged,  Paul  lays  down  no  plan  for  progressively  achiev- 
ing the  needed  sanctification.  Perhaps  he  does  not  in  an 
explicit  and  formal  manner.  He  does  not  take  pains  to 
distinguish  between  the  demands  of  the  first  stage  of 
Christian  life  and  those  of  subsequent  stages.  But  why 
should  he  ?  Vital  union  with  the  Father,  through  the 
Son,  by  the  bond  of  faith,  is  as  much  the  fundamental 
demand  of  all  later  stages  as  it  is  of  the  primary.  And 
closely  linked  with  this  demand  is  the  requirement  that 
conduct  in  all  varied  spheres  should  be  actively  directed 
toward  conformity  to  the  practical  dictates  of  this  union. 
This  latter  requirement  Paul  has  not  failed  to  urge  with 
great  vigor.  While  he  emphasizes  the  futility  of  depend- 
ence for  salvation  upon  a  scheme  of  works,  he  never  in 
the  least  disparages  good  works  as  a  matter  of  obligation, 
congruity,  and  logical  necessity  on  the  part  of  the  reborn 
man.     It  appears,  therefore,  that  his  disciples  were  not 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  249 

left  without  very  positive  suggestions  and  directions  as  to 
the  means  of  perfecting  themselves  in  Christian  character. 

The  conditions  of  the  apostolic  era  naturally  dictated 
that  only  a  subordinate  consideration  should  be  given  to 
the  subject  of  civic  virtue  and  responsibility.  The  fact 
that  the  management  of  the  State  was  in  the  hands  of  the 
unbelieving  wrought  with  the  expectation  that  the  age 
would  be  short  to  incline  Christian  teachers  to  treat  but 
briefly  of  political  duties.  Paul  takes  up  the  theme  only 
to  enforce  the  obligation  of  Christians  to  submit  con- 
scientiously to  the  authority  of  the  State.  His  vision  of 
the  kingdom  of  Christ  as  overpassing  all  bounds  of  par- 
ticular nations  and  countries  does  not  seem  to  have  bred 
in  his  mind  any  disposition  to  ignore  the  claims  of  regular 
governments.  At  any  rate  he  strongly  accentuates  the 
duty  of  subjection  to  those  in  power  as  being  ordained  of 
God  for  the  public  weal.^  The  qualifications  upon  civil 
allegiance  which  conscience  and  the  commands  of  God 
may  logically  involve,  he  leaves  his  disciples  to  discover 
and  apply  for  themselves.  His  judgment  that  it  is  un- 
seemly for  Christians  to  carry  their  disputes  before  the 
secular  tribunals  may  be  expressed  in  terms  disparaging 
to  the  notion  of  believers  being  judged  by  the  unbeliev- 
ing.2  But  the  stress  here  is  not  so  much  upon  the  fact 
of  the  judgment  being  rendered  by  the  outside  tribunal, 
as  upon  its  being  voluntarily  sought  by  quarrelsome  Chris- 
tians, in  place  of  their  trying  for  a  settlement  at  home. 
Doubtless  the  apostle  did  not  intend  to  hint  that  slight 
consideration  is  in  general  due  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the 

1  Rom.  xiii.  1-7.  2  j  Cor.  vi.  1-8. 


250  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

secular  power.  It  is  one  thing  to  respect  and  obey  the 
guardian  of  civil  order ;  it  is  quite  another  thing  volun- 
tarily to  seek  his  decision  in  a  case  of  variance  between 
brethren. 

As  Paul  was  conservative  in  his  teaching  on  the  alle- 
giance due  to  the  State,  so  also  he  was  far  from  the  de- 
sign to  precipitate  social  revolution.  In  relation  to  slav- 
ery he  contented  himself  with  urging  humane  treatment 
from  the  side  of  the  master  and  willing  service  from  the 
side  of  the  bondman.  His  contribution  to  the  cause  of 
emancipation  lay  in  his  distinct  proclamation  of  the  es- 
sential equality  of  men  in  Christ.  In  no  other  form 
probably  could  he  have  made  so  effective  a  contribution. 

In  Paul's  conception  of  Christian  life  in  relation  to  the 
domestic  sphere  some  contrasted  points  of  view  may  be 
noticed.  On  the  one  hand,  though  disclaiming  all 
thought  of  abridging  personal  liberty,  he  expresses  a 
certain  preference  for  the  unmarried  life.^  On  the  other 
hand,  he  dignifies  marriage  as  a  holy  union  in  the  bonds 
of  love  fit  to  be  compared  to  the  union  of  Christ  with 
His  Church.2  On  the  one  hand,  he  teaches  the  subordi- 
nation of  woman  to  man.^  On  the  other  hand,  he  affirms 
that  in  Christ  distinctions  of  male  and  female  have  no 
place  any  more  than  distinctions  of  Jew  and  Greek.*  To 
bring  complete  unity  of  view  out  of  these  contrasts  is 
not  altogether  easy.  But  the  outcome  seems  to  be 
about  this:  (i)  Entrance  into  the  marriage  relation  is 
contemplated  by  Paul  as  the  general  rule  for  Christians. 
He  considers,  however,  that  in  individual  instances  the 

1  I  Cor.  vii.  '  I  Cor.  xi.  3-10, 

2  Eph.  V.  22-23.  *  Gal.  iii.  28. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  2$! 

ends  of  personal  piety  and  religious  service  may  be  best 
attained  by  abstinence  from  marriage.  In  commending 
this  abstinence  he  appears  to  have  been  influenced,  to  a 
considerable  extent,  by  the  troublous  conditions  of  the 
time  and  the  expected  approach  of  the  day  of  Christ's 
coming.  (2)  Spiritually  man  and  woman,  in  Paul's  view, 
stand  upon  the  same  plane ;  but  to  subserve  the  ends  of 
household  and  social  order  the  husband  has  been  vested 
with  a  certain  headship  over  the  wife.  This  headship, 
however,  is  properly  fulfilled  only  as  it  is  patterned  after 
the  self-sacrificing  and  loving  headship  of  Christ.  "  Hus- 
bands ought  so  to  love  their  own  wives  as  their  own 
bodies.  He  that  loveth  his  own  wife  loveth  himself  :  for 
no  man  ever  hated  his  own  flesh  ;  but  nourisheth  it,  even 
as  Christ  also  the  Church."  (3)  Possibly,  as  has  been 
alleged  by  some  critics,  Paul  did  not  fully  transcend  the 
antique  view  of  the  relative  position  of  the  two  sexes. 
But  if  any  of  his  statements  need  to  be  modified,  he  has 
himself  afforded  a  basis  for  the  necessary  modification  in 
his  strong  declarations  respecting  the  elimination  of  all 
artificial  distinctions  in  and  through  Christ. 

The  emphatic  view  which  Paul  held  of  the  marriage 
union  naturally  inclined  him  to  accord  a  very  scanty 
place  to  divorce.  He  mentions,  however,  one  ground  as 
justifiying  the  nullification  of  the  marriage  bond.  If  the 
unbelieving  partner  will  not  abide  with  the  believing  or 
Christian  partner,  let  the  former  depart.  "  A  brother 
or  a  sister  is  not  under  bondage  in  such  cases."  ^  Exe- 
getes  differ  on  the  question  whether  in  this  statement 
the  apostle  licenses  the  remarriage  of  the  deserted  part- 

1  I  Cor.  vii.  12-15. 


252  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ner.  In  our  view,  the  words  ''not  under  bondage"  favor 
an  affirmative  answer.  The  apostle  could  hardly  have 
thought  it  necessary  to  make  a  formal  declaration  that 
the  husband  or  wife  was  not  bound  to  maintain  cohabi- 
tation with  the  deserting  party  —  a  thing  most  obviously 
impossible.  This  interpretation,  it  is  true,  exhibits  Paul 
as  at  variance  with  the  letter  of  Christ's  teaching,  which 
at  most  admits  divorce  only  for  the  cause  of  adultery .^ 
But  Paul  may  have  taken  that  teaching,  as  he  appears  to 
have  taken  the  instruction  relative  to  oaths,  as  rather 
setting  up  a  standard  for  an  ideal  society  than  giving  an 
inflexible  rule  to  be  rigorously  followed  under  all  kinds 
of  conditions.  Not  a  few  writers  on  ethics  have  been 
inclined  to  take  Christ's  teaching  in  this  sense. 


X. —  The  Church  and  the  Sacraments. 

In  the  earlier  Pauline  epistles  a  local  association  is  for 
the  most  part  given  to  the  word  "Church."  It  is  used 
to  designate  a  particular  Christian  society ;  and  where  a 
number  of  such  societies  are  contemplated  the  plural  form 
of  the  word  is  employed.^  Only  in  exceptional  instances 
is  the  term  used  in  these  epistles  to  designate  the  whole 
body  of  Christians  in  the  world.^  On  the  other  hand,  in 
the  later  epistles,  notably  in  Ephesians,  references  to 
the  Church  in  the  collective  sense  predominate.  This 
naturally  resulted  from  the  more  theoretic   standpoint 

iMatt.  V.  32,  xix.  9;  Mark  x.  5-12;  Luke  xvi.  18. 
2  Rom.  xvi.  4,  5;  I  Cor.  i.  2,  iv.  17,  vii.  17,  xi.  16,  xiv.  33,  34,  xvi.  i, 
19 ;  2  Cor.  viii.  i,  19,  23,  xi.  8,  28,  xii.  13 ;   i  Thess.  ii.  14  ;  2  Thess.  i.  4. 
8  I  Cor.  xii.  28  ;  Gal.  i.  13. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  253 

from  which  the  subject  was  approached  in  the  later  writ- 
ings. The  change  of  usage  is  not,  therefore,  any  very 
decisive  evidence  either  of  change  in  conviction  or  of 
advance  in  ecclesiastical  organization. 

The  number  of  references  to  the  Church  is  greatly  in 
excess  of  that  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  latter  ex- 
pression is  used,  on  the  one  hand,  to  designate  the  sum 
of  spiritual  treasure  which  belongs  to  the  Christian  in 
the  present,  the  rule  of  the  divine  in  him  with  all  that  it 
brings  for  the  replenishment  of  the  interior  life,^  and,  on 
the  other,  in  an  eschatological  sense,  to  designate  the 
perfected  community  which  lies  beyond  the  era  of  the 
resurrection.  The  latter  meaning  is  especially  unmis- 
takable in  the  declaration  that  flesh  and  blood  cannot 
inherit  the  kingdom  of  God.^  As  related  to  the  Church 
the  kingdom  has  the  more  ideal  and  transcendental  sig- 
nificance. The  two  are  not  formally  identified  by  the 
apostle.  Yet  it  is  quite  evident  that  when  he  comes  to 
picture  the  Church  according  to  its  divine  purpose,  as  he 
does  in  Ephesians  and  Colossians,  he  puts  into  it  nearly 
everything  that  is  denoted  by  the  kingdom  of  God  in 
scriptural  usage.  It  stands  forth  as  the  body  of  Christ, 
the  fullness  of  Him  who  filleth  all  in  all,  the  instrument 
for  making  known  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God,  in  design 
a  perfect  society,  holy  and  without  blemish,  its  members 
bearing  the  name  and  the  character  of  saints,  being 
bound  together  by  the  bond  of  love,  and  fulfilling  har- 
moniously their  several  functions,  like  the  parts  of  a 
well-framed  building  or  of  a  living  organism. 

1  Rom.  xiv.  17;  I  Cor.  iv.  20;  Col.  i.  12-14. 

2  I  Cor.  XV.  50.     Compare  i  Cor.  vi.  9,  10;  Gal.  v.  21. 


254  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Aside  from  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  the  writings  of  Paul 
contain  little  mention  of  church  officials.  In  Galatians 
there  is  no  reference  to  any  class  of  administrators.  The 
only  official  rank  of  which  indication  is  given  is  that  of 
teachers  ;  ^  and  it  would  seem  probable  from  the  descrip- 
tion given  in  i  Cor.  xiv  that  these  had  no  exclusive  pre- 
rogative in  the  public  service.  In  First  Thessalonians 
and  in  Romans  there  is  a  general  reference  to  those  in- 
trusted with  a  function  of  supervision.^  The  Epistle  to 
the  Philippians  opens  with  a  reference  to  bishops  and 
deacons,  and  in  Ephesians  the  work  of  ministering  is 
represented  as  portioned  out  to  apostles,  prophets,  evan- 
gelists, pastors  and  teachers.^  In  this  latter  enumera- 
tion the  intent  of  the  apostle  was  evidently  to  give  rather 
a  full  list  of  ministerial  functions  than  to  specify  distinct 
and  well-defined  grades  of  officials.  Between  prophets, 
evangelists,  and  teachers  the  lines  of  division  were  not 
so  wide  but  that  one  person  might  belong  to  the  several 
classes.  Something  more  of  an  association  with  the  local 
church,  however,  probably  went  with  the  last  term  than 
with  the  other  two.  The  prophets  as  inspired  preachers 
and  the  evangelists  as  missionary  assistants  of  the  apos- 
tles exercised  their  gifts  somewhat  at  large  in  the 
Church. 

It  is  to  be  noticed  in  connection  with  the  Ephesian 
passage  that  the  form  of  the  Greek — the  non-repetition 
of  T0U9  Se  —  implies  that  pastors  and  teachers  were 
thought  of  as  designating  one  and  the  same  class  of  offi- 
cials.    The  former  name  is  naturally  suggestive  of  a  local 

1  Gal.  vi.  6.  2  I  Thess.  v.  12,  Rom.  xii.  8.    See  also  i  Cor.  xii.  28. 

»Eph.  iv.  II. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  255 

office  with  a  function  of  oversight.  In  this  character  it 
seems  to  be  identical  with  the  office  of  bishops  mentioned 
in  Philippians.  Putting  together  the  Philippian  and  the 
Ephesian  passage,  we  are  brought  to  the  conclusion  that 
within  the  sphere  of  Paul's  supervision  it  came  to  be 
counted  expedient  for  the  local  church  to  have  a  group 
of  administrators  called  bishops  or  pastors,  who  might 
also  very  appropriately  exercise  a  teaching  function,  and 
a  second  group,  called  deacons  (indicated  perhaps  by  the 
word  ** helps"  in  i  Cor.  xii.  28),  whose  distinctive  ser- 
vice consisted  in  ministry  to  the  poor  and  the  sick.  As 
for  elders,  they  are  not  mentioned  in  the  epistles  under 
consideration.  The  question  of  their  identity  with  bish- 
ops is,  therefore,  properly  postponed  till  the  teaching  of 
the  Pastoral  Epistles  comes  to  be  considered. 

On  the  whole,  under  the  Pauline  regime  officialism  seems 
not  to  have  been  prominent.  The  apostles,  as  missionary 
founders  of  churches,  are  represented  doubtless  as  having 
actually  a  commanding  influence.  But  they  are  repre- 
sented also  as  minded  to  direct  those  under  their  charge 
rather  by  the  method  of  instruction  and  persuasion  than 
by  that  of  law  and  decree.  Of  a  monarchical  constitution 
of  the  Church  no  hint  is  given.  The  declarations  of 
Paul  in  Galatians  rebel  utterly  against  the  notion  of  a 
Petrine  headship  or  primacy  of  governing  authority. 

In  the  line  of  solemn  rites,  or  sacraments,  the  Pauline 
writings  recognize  baptism  and  the  eucharist.  The  for- 
mer is  regarded  as  typical  of  union  with  Christ,  as  well 
as  instrumental  to  union  with  the  visible  society.  In  this 
view  it  is  styled  baptism  into  Christ.^     To  be  in  union 

1  Gal.  iii.  27. 


256  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

with  Christ  involves,  according  to  the  apostle,  a  dying  of 
the  old  man  and  a  rising  into  newness  of  life.  Baptism 
figures  this  moral  renewal,  and  thus  in  picturesque  lan- 
guage may  be  described  as  a  burial  and  a  resurrection.^ 
How  far  the  apostle  accounted  baptism  instrumental  of 
the  great  change  which  it  symbolizes  is  not  definitely 
stated.  But  surely  it  may  be  argued  from  the  tenor  of 
his  thinking  that  he  had  no  notion  of  placing  it  on  any- 
thing like  a  parity  with  such  a  spiritual  condition  of  the 
new  life  as  is  faith.  Repeatedly  and  energetically  he 
proclaimed  faith  as  the  condition  of  justification,  and  jus- 
tification and  regeneration  were  not  regarded  by  him  as 
separated  in  fact.  It  puts  him  in  incredible  contradiction 
with  himself  to  suppose  that,  while  lauding  the  saving 
office  of  faith  and  casting  Judaic  ceremonialism  overboard, 
he  proceeded  to  condition  birth  into  the  new  life  upon  an 
external  rite.  "Think  of  the  man,  "  says  Bruce,  "who 
so  peremptorily  said  circumcision  is  of  no  avail,  assigning 
to  baptism  not  merely  symbolical,  but  essential  signifi- 
cance in  reference  to  regeneration.  Then  how  weak  his 
position  controversially,  if  this  was  his  view  !  How  easy 
for  Judaistic  opponents  to  retort,  what  better  are  you 
than  we  ?  You  set  aside  circumcision,  and  you  put  in  its 
place  baptism.  We  fail  to  see  the  great  advantage  of  the 
change.  You  insist  grandly  on  the  antithesis  between 
letter  and  spirit,  or  between  flesh  and  spirit.  But  here 
is  no  antithesis.  Baptism,  not  less  than  circumcision,  is 
simply  a  rite  affecting  the  body.  You  charge  us  with 
beginning  in  the  spirit  and  with  faith,  and  ending  in  the 
flesh.     How  do  you  defend  yourself  against  the  same 

1  Rom.  vi.  4. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  257 

charge  ? "  ^  It  is  indeed  possible,  since  in  the  first  age  of 
the  Church  the  administration  of  baptism  was  often  near- 
ly synchronous  with  the  exercise  and  confession  of  faith 
in  Christ,  and  moreover  was  very  likely  attended  in  many 
instances  with  tokens  of  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
that  the  apostle  gave  it  a  certain  association  with  the  ex- 
perience of  regeneration.  But  it  sadly  violates  perspec- 
tive in  exegesis  to  make  him  the  advocate  of  a  theory 
of  baptism  which  exalts  its  function  to  the  level  of  the 
great  spiritual  and  interior  conditions  of  salvation. 

The  Pauline  interpretation  of  the  Lord's  supper  sets 
it  forth  as  a  symbol  of  the  unity  of  Christian  believers, 
a  memorial  of  the  self-sacrificing  death  of  Christ,  and 
a  means  of  communion  with  Him.^  The  communion, 
KOivcovia,  is  to  be  understood  in  a  spiritual  sense,  as 
opposed  to  any  conjunction  with  the  real  body  of  Christ. 
The  apostle  indicates  as  much  in  his  statement,  that 
they  which  eat  the  sacrifices  are  communicants  {kolvcovol) 
of  the  altar,^  that  is,  come  into  a  special  relation  with 
the  altar,  or  with  the  divinity  represented  thereby.  As 
in  the  latter  instance  there  is  no  notion  of  an  appropria- 
tion of  bodily  substance  from  the  object  of  the  com- 
munion, so  it  may  be  inferred  that  the  former  instance 
implies  no  such  notion.  What  is  said  of  making  one's 
self  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  by  eating  and 
drinking  unworthily,  or  of  earning  judgment  by  not  dis- 
cerning the  Lord's  body,  in  no  wise  contradicts  this 
view.  As  the  context  shows  there  was  occasion  to 
rebuke  an  irreverent  dealing  with  the  sacred  emblems  of 

1  St.  Paul's  Conception  of  Christianity,  pp  237,  238. 

2  I  Cor.  X.  16,  17,  xi.  23-29.  3  I  Cor.  x.  18. 


258  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Christ's  passion.  This  profanation  of  divinely  ordained 
symbols  and  careless  lack  of  discernment  for  what  they 
stand  the  apostle  condemns  as  in  effect  a  trespass  against 
the  holy  things  symbolized.^  His  entire  exposition  gives 
no  real  foothold  for  a  materialistic  interpretation  of  the 
communion  to  which  the  rite  is  instrumental. 


XI.  —  The  Second  Advent  and  the  Related 
Events. 

The  certain  elements  in  the  eschatology  of  Paul  are 
the  second  coming  of  Christ,  the  resurrection  of  the 
righteous  in  the  sense  of  their  investment  with  incor- 
ruptible bodies,  and  a  final  judgment  before  the  tribunal 
of  Christ.  To  each  of  these  items  the  apostle  has  wit- 
nessed his  belief  in  sufficiently  unequivocal  terms. 

In  his  earlier  epistles  Paul  evinces  a  conviction  of  the 
possibility,  if  not  indeed  of  the  probability,  that  the 
advent  of  Christ  would  occur  before  he  himself  should 
be  overtaken  by  death.^  Further  on,  this  conviction 
seems  to  have  been  relinquished,  and  in  its  place  we 
find  a  presentiment  of  exit  from  the  earth  by  the  ordin- 
ary pathway.^     Respecting  the  nature    of   the    second 

1  "  If  it  is  regarded  as  a  deadly  insult  to  a  country  when  its  flag  is 
torn  down  and  trampled  in  the  dust,  surely  it  is  an  insult  to  Jesus  Christ 
Himself,  and  to  the  great  sacrifice  of  His  body  and  blood,  if  the  symbols 
of  that  sacrifice  are  treated  as  profane  or  common  things,  even  though 
it  is  not  imagined  that  these  symbols,  somehow  or  other,  have  been 
transformed  into  that  which  they  symbolize."  (Lambert,  The  Sacra- 
ments in  the  New  Testament,  p.  377.) 

2  I  Thess.  iv.  17  ;  i  Cor.  xv.  51,  52. 
*  2  Cor.  V.  I,  8;  Phil.  i.  20-24. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  259 

advent,  the  Pauline  exposition  is  not  necessarily  regarded 
as  presuming  upon  anything  more  than  a  glorious  and 
unmistakable  manifestation  of  the  ascended  Christ  to 
men  generally.  In  his  most  detailed  description  the 
apostle  represents,  not  that  Christ  is  to  install  Himself 
upon  the  earth,  but  that  the  saints  are  to  be  caught  up 
in  the  clouds  to  meet  Him  in  the  air,  and  so  to  be  for- 
ever with  the  Lord.^  No  recorded  sentence  gives  a 
hint  that  he  thought  of  a  visible  reign  of  Christ  upon 
earth.  On  the  contrary,  the  spiritual  character  which 
he  ascribes  to  the  bodies  of  the  risen  saints  and  the 
transformation  of  living  saints,  which  he  makes  coinci- 
dent with  the  revelation  of  Christ  from  heaven,  fairly 
shut  out  the  idea  of  an  earthly  millennial  kingdom. 

It  appears  from  the  Thessalonian  epistles  that  Paul 
wished  Christians  to  cultivate  an  inspiring  expectancy 
relative  to  the  advent,  but  at  the  same  time  to  avoid  dis- 
quietude and  feverish  anxiety.  To  check  an  overwrought 
anticipation  he  mentions  an  event  which  must  go  before 
the  day  of  the  Lord,  namely  the  disclosure  of  the  man 
of  sin,  who  is  held  back  by  one  that  restraineth,  but  in 
time  will  gain  liberty  to  run  his  course  of  lawlessness.^ 
The  precise  meaning  of  the  representation  remains  in 
question.  Some  exegetes  think  that  no  theory  better 
meets  the  case  than  the  one  which  assumes  that  the 
restraining  power  designates  the  Roman  government, 
and  that  the  man  of  sin  stands  for  a  culminating  expres- 
sion of  Jewish  apostasy  and  false  messiahship.^     The 

1  I  Thess.  iv.  13-17.  2  2  Thess.  ii.  T-12. 

8  So  Weiss,  Bousset,  Moffatt,  Stevens,  Bacon,  Adeney,  Kennedy,  and 
others. 


26o  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

main  difficulty  with  this  theory  is  the  assumption  of 
divine  honors  by  the  lawless  one.  For  a  Jew  to  push 
on  to  that  height  of  blasphemous  pretence  would  indeed 
be  madness.  It  is  not  entirely  certain,  however,  that 
Paul  did  not  think  it  possible  for  a  Jewish  pretender, 
spurred  on  by  the  excited  feeling  and  desperation  of  the 
nation,  to  fall  into  the  madness  of  practically  usurping 
the  honor  and  authority  of  God.  The  description  in 
I  Thess.  ii.  14-16  indicates  how  intense  at  this  period 
was  the  apostle's  impression  of  Jewish  rebellion  against 
God  and  the  truth.  If  the  man  of  sin  was  not  conceived 
to  belong  to  an  anti-Christian  Judaism,  it  is  difficult  to 
interpret  the  reference  to  the  restraining  power  in  any 
satisfactory  manner.  It  is  an  unlikely  supposition  that 
the  Roman  government  should  be  thought  of  as  playing 
both  the  role  of  restraint  and  that  of  a  godless  usurpa- 
tion and  lawlessness,  that  is,  through  different  represen- 
tatives of  the  imperial  sovereignty.  No  probable  ground 
can  be  imagined  for  the  association  of  self-deification 
with  one  of  the  Caesars  to  the  exclusion  of  others. 
Already  before  Paul  wrote,  divine  honors  had  been  paid 
to  several  emperors  and  had  been  ostentatiously  claimed 
by  Caligula.  For  another  to  proceed  in  the  same  fashion 
would  not  give  him  a  title  to  be  regarded  as  a  highly 
exceptional  impersonation  of  ungodliness,  the  veritable 
man  of  sin.  This  difficulty  of  finding  a  suitable  meaning 
for  the  restraining  power,  if  the  man  of  sin  is  identified 
with  a  representative  of  imperial  rule,  tends  to  turn  the 
scale  in  favor  of  the  conclusion  that  the  apostle  thought 
of  Judaism  as  the  source  of  this  portentous  figure.  The 
same  conclusion  is  also  favored  by  the  reference  to  the 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  261 

"apostasy,"  or  "falling  away"  (ii.  3),  since  an  event  of 
this   order  is  naturally  connected  rather  with  an  elect 
■  people  than  with  one  which  had  not  been  given  a  special 
divine  association      But  while  claiming  a  superior  prob- 
ability for  this  interpretation,  we  admit  the  possibility 
that  the  form  which  loomed  up  before  the  apostle's  mind 
may  not  have  been  so  definite  as  to  be  positively  identi-  \ 
fied  either  with  a  counterfeit  Messiah  or  with  a  self-  \ 
deified  Caesar.     He  may  have  thought  somewhat  vaguely    . 
of  a  culminating  expression  of  revolution,  lawlessness,    ) 
and  God-defying  presumption. 

The  resurrection  which  Paul  associated  immediately 
with  the  second  advent,  evidently  was  not  understood  by 
him  to  be  a  literal  resurrection  of  the  body  as  known  to 
us.  The  account  in  i  Cor.  xv  emphasizes  the  radical 
unlikeness  of  the  body  that  is  to  be  with  that  of  the 
present,  and  the  mention  of  it  in  2  Cor.  v.  i,  2  as  a 
house  or  habitation  from  heaven  heightens  the  impres- 
sion of  unlikeness.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  apostle 
uses  language  suggestive  of  some  sort  of  historical  con- 
nection and  basis  of  identity  as  pertaining  to  the  bodies 
of  the  two  states  He  speaks  of  the  body  as  being  sown 
in  one  condition  and  raised  in  another  —  sown  in  cor- 
ruption and  raised  in  incorruption,  sown  a  natural  body 
and  raised  a  spiritual  body.^  He  says  that  the  reappear- 
ing Saviour  shall  fashion  anew  the  body  of  our  humilia- 
tion, that  it  may  be  conformed  to  the  body  of  his  glory.^ 

1  I  Cor.  XV.  42-44.  That  the  "  spiritual  "  body  was  not  conceived  to 
be  made  of  spirit  (TrveO/xa)  may  be  judged  from  the  fact  that  the 
"  natural  "  or  psychical  body  was  manifestly  not  conceived  to  be  made 
of  soul  {^f/vxyj)  but  of  flesh. 

2  Phil.  iii.  20,  21. 


262  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

He  represents  the  high  destination  toward  which  the 
sons  of  God  look  with  desire  to  be  the  redemption  of 
their  bodies.^  Thus  with  all  the  intimation  of  newness 
and  unlikeness  there  is  an  implicit  assumption  of  a  cer- 
tain sameness.  In  what  the  apostle  located  this  element 
of  sameness,  or  whether  he  took  pains  to  define  it  to  his 
own  thought,  we  have  no  means  of  ascertaining.  It  is 
a  little  venturesome  to  suppose  that  he  anticipated  modern 
theorizing  and  predicated  identity  in  respect  of  organizing 
principle. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  general  teaching  of  Paul 
implies  a  special  era  of  resurrection.  It  has  been  sus- 
pected by  some,  however,  on  the  basis  of  the  opening 
verses  of  the  fifth  chapter  of  Second  Corinthians,  that 
Paul  changed  his  view,  and  in  his  later  days  believed 
that  each  follower  of  Christ  is  invested  at  death  with  the 
resurrection  body.  But  this  seems  to  us  an  unwarranted 
conclusion.  The  second  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  was 
written  only  a  few  months  after  the  first,  in  which  the 
contrary  view  is  set  forth  with  sufficient  definiteness. 
Paul  naturally  would  not  be  ambitious  to  confuse  the 
minds  of  the  Corinthians  by  placing  before  them  within 
so  short  an  interval  two  ways  of  thinking  that  he  knew 
to  be  contradictory.  The  tone  of  the  later  Corinthian 
passage  is  largely  explained  by  the  fact  that  Paul  had 
no  such  measure  of  the  intermediate  state  as  belongs  to 
us.  In  the  expectation  that  it  would  be  confined  to  a 
brief  season,  he  could  practically  ignore  it,  and  in  the 
vision  of  faith  paint  the  being  clothed  upon  with  the 
house  from  heaven  as  following  close  upon  the  dissolu- 

1  Rom.  viii.  23. 


THE   PAULINE  THEOLOGY  263 

tion  of  the  earthly  tabernacle.  Moreover,  it  is  to  be 
noticed  that  he  does  not  express  a  certitude  that  there 
would  be  no  interval  of  nakedness,  but  only  an  earnest 
longing  to  be  clothed  upon,  '*  that  what  is  mortal  may 
be  swallowed  up  of  life."  It  may  be  observed  that  Paul 
in  the  preceding  chapter  uses  the  ordinary  resurrection 
phraseology,  representing  himself  as  expecting  to  be 
raised  up  even  as  was  Christ  (iv.  14).  This  as  much  as 
hints  that  the  poetic  reference  to  a  house  or  habitation 
from  heaven  is  not  to  be  construed  too  definitely,  or  to 
be  taken  as  implying  a  distinct  and  conscious  departure 
from  his  former  teaching.  Not  less  significant  are  the 
words  of  Phil.  iii.  19-21.  Here  it  is  represented  that 
the  resurrection  power  of  Christ  is  to  be  exercised  at 
His  second  coming.  A  plain  indication  is  thus  given 
that  Paul  had  not  surrendered  his  earlier  thought  of  a 
special  era  for  the  resurrection. 

The  resurrection  which  Paul  discusses  in  his  epistles 
contemplates  an  assimilation  to  the  glorious  form  of  the 
risen  Christ.  In  this  character  it  is  a  resurrection  of 
those  only  who  belong  to  Christ.  The  question  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  wicked  is  entirely  ignored.  Not  a 
single  sentence  of  a  single  epistle  touches  upon  it,  at 
least  in  any  direct  or  unmistakable  manner.  The  state- 
ment in  I  Cor.  xv.  22,  *'as  in  Adam  all  die,  so  also  in 
Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive,"  is  no  exception.  For, 
to  say  nothing  about  an  implicit  limitation  in  the  phrase 
"  in  Christ,"  the  next  verse  confines  the  application  to 
those  that  are  Christ's.  It  is  true  that  some  commen- 
tators understand  by  the  succeeding  declaration,  "  then 
Cometh  the  end,"  the  completing  stage  of  the  resurrec- 


264  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

tion,  wherein  the  wicked  are  to  be  included.  But  it  is 
immensly  improbable  that  the  apostle  would  have  re- 
ferred in  so  vague  a  manner  to  the  resurrection  of  a 
division  of  mankind.  Moreover,  the  words,  "  then  cometh 
the  end,"  are  most  naturally  understood  of  the  close  of 
the  dispensation.  Silence  on  the  score  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  wicked  is  not,  indeed,  necessarily  equivalent 
to  a  denial  of  the  event.  The  fact  that  the  apostle  was 
addressing  believers,  and  dealt  with  the  subject  from  the 
point  of  view  of  their  interest,  may  go  far  toward  ex- 
plaining his  silence.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  the  quickening  of  the  mortal  body  is  given 
in  one  connection  a  certain  association  with  the  indwell- 
ing of  the  Spirit,^  and  that  in  another  connection  the 
resurrection  from  the  dead  is  represented  as  a  prize  to 
be  won  by  strenuous  endeavor,^  and  still  further  that 
eternal  destruction  is  said  to  await  the  wicked  at  Christ's 
I  coming.^  On  the  whole,  the  teaching  of  Paul's  epistles 
\  taken  by  itself  is  scarcely  favorable  to  the  supposition  of 
\.  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked.  It  contains  nothing  which 
'  suggests  the  conviction  recorded  in  Acts  xxiv.  15,  unless 
it  be  the  representation  that  all  men  are  candidates  for 
the  judgment ;  and  before  this  could  be  given  any  deci- 
sive weight  it  would  be  necessary  to  prove  that  Paul 
thought  of  the  investment  of  a  given   subject  with  a 

1  Rom.  viii.  lo,  ii.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  here  a  reference 
to  an  actual  initiation  of  the  bodily  resurrection  by  the  indwelling  Spirit. 
The  probable  thought  is  that  the  working  of  the  life-giving  Spirit  in 
man's  spirit  is  a  pledge  that  even  the  body  of  the  believer  shall  ulti- 
mately be  redeemed  from  corruption  and  death.  (Compare  Godet, 
Comm.  on  Romans.) 

2  Phil.  iii.  II.  82  Thess.  i.  5-10. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  265 

resurrection  body  as  a  necessary  antecedent  of  his  being 
judged. 

Considerable  stress  has  been  laid  by  some  critics  on 
the  contrast  between  Paul's  doctrine  of  salvation  through 
grace  and  his  picture  of  judgment  on  the  basis  of  conduct, 
as  though  he  had  inadvertently  mingled  a  Christian  and 
a  Judaic  point  of  view.  But  it  is  the  reverse  of  a  mag- 
nanimous exegesis  which  so  interprets.  It  is  quite  gratu- 
itous to  conclude  that  into  the  Judaic  form  of  words 
Paul  .put  a  crass  Judaic  sense.  He  never  forgot,  doubt- 
less, his  own  central  teaching,  or  conceived  that  any  work 
apart  from  the  genuine  faith  which  brings  the  soul  into 
fruit-bearing  union  with  Christ  could  serve  a  man  before 
the  divine  tribunal.  The  total  doing  of  a  man  is  what 
Paul  may  reasonably  be  thought  to  have  regarded  as 
determining  future  destiny,  and  the  total  doing  of  a  man 
includes  his  response  to  the  unmerited  grace  of  God  in 
Christ.  Only  those  who  suppose  the  apostle  to  make 
absolutely  nothing  of  man's  free  agency  have  any  serious 
occasion  to  criticise  his  picture  of  the  judgment. 

What  lies  beyond  the  judgment  is  considered  by  Paul 
only  in  a  very  general  way.  He  contents  himself  with 
picturing  a  scene  of  unity,  a  kingdom  before  which 
all  opposition  has  given  way.^  The  wicked  are  not  as- 
signed any  place  in  that  ultimate  scene.  Did  Paul  regard 
them  as  the  subjects  of  an  all-embracing  restoration  ? 
This  view  is  contradicted  by  the  representation  that  they 
are  appointed  to  eternal  destruction  from  the  face  of  the 
Lord. 2     They  pass  out  of  the  field  of  vision  either  as 

^  I  Cor.  XV.  24-27. 

2  2  Thess.  i.  9.  The  term  "  destruction  "  (oXe^pos)  employed  here 
cannot  fairly  be  regarded  as  a  token  that  Paul  was  formally  committed  to 


266  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

being  reduced  to  practical  impotence  or  as  consigned  to 
non-existence.  Our  reticence  on  Paul's  position  may  well 
match  in  some  degree  his  reticence  on  the  subject. 


XII. —  The  Teaching  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles. 

The  Pastoral  Epistles  add  so  little  of  theological  sub- 
ject-matter to  the  content  of  the  other  epistles  bearing 
the  name  of  Paul  that  it  will  not  be  necessary  to  devote 
to  them  more  than  a  few  sentences.  A  tribute  is  paid 
in  them  to  the  transcendence  of  God,  in  that  He  is  de- 
scribed as  dwelling  in  light  unapproachable.^  At  the  same 
time  His  fatherly  and  compassionate  character  is  not 
overlooked.  Christ  is  styled  the  one  mediator  who  gave 
Himself  a  ransom  for  all,  the  saviour  who  has  abolished 
death,  and  the  judge  of  the  quick  and  the  dead.^  In 
one  instance  the  form  of  statement  in  the  original  seems 
to  imply  the  application  of  the  divine  name  to  Him.^ 
The  salvation  provided  in  Him  is  designed  for  all  men.* 
It  is  not  earned  by  works  ;  its  bestowment  is  a  matter  of 
grace. ^  Christian  living  is  to  be  characterized  by  so- 
briety and  self-discipline,  though  ascetic  prescriptions 
against  marriage  and  the  use  of  meats  are  to  be  repro- 

the  doctrine  of  the  annihilation  of  the  wicked.  From  his  point  of  view 
it  was  not  worth  while  to  distinguish  between  an  impoverished,  wretched 
existence  and  non-existence.  (Compare  Kennedy,  St.  Paul's  Concep- 
tions of  the  Last  Things,  pp  120-125.) 

1 1  Tim.  vi.  16.  *  I  Tim.  ii.  4,  iv.  10. 

2  I  Tim.  ii.  5,  6 ;  2  Tim.  i.  10,  iv.  i.  ^  2  Tim.  i.  9  ;  Tit.  iii.  4-7. 

«Tit.  ii.  13. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  267 

bated.^  Among  Christian  interests  to  which  great  heed 
needs  to  be  given  is  the  preservation  of  sound  doctrine. 

In  general,  it  is  easy  to  observe  in  these  epistles  a 
strain  of  the  characteristic  Pauline  teaching.  Still  the 
standpoint  of  the  foregoing  epistles  is  not  fully  repro- 
duced in  them.  The  representation  of  a  mystical  union 
with  Christ  is  wanting.  In  place  of  the  life  insphered  in 
Christ  we  have  well-ordered  conduct,  or  godliness,  set 
forth  and  commended.  The  voice  of  Paul  as  the  ardent 
mystic  we  do  not  hear. 

As  compared  with  the  preceding  epistles  the  Pastoral 
give  an  impression  of  a  more  settled  and  developed  form 


1  I  Tim.  iv.  3,  4.  On  the  other  hand,  a  token  of  ascetic  tendency  may 
be  found  in  these  epistles,  if  the  conclusion  is  to  be  accepted  that  the 
requisition  for  the  bishop,  and  for  the  deacon  as  well,  to  be  the  husband 
of  one  wife,  was  meant  to  discountenance  second  marriages  for  the 
clergy  (i  Tim.  iii.  2,  12).  In  favor  of  taking  the  requisition  in  this 
sense  it  is  urged  :  (i)  There  is  little  reason  to  suppose  a  formal  injunction 
here  against  polygamy,  since  at  that  time  polygamous  practice  was  too 
rare  both  among  Jews  and  Gentiles  to  give  occasion  to  a  prohibition ; 
and  least  of  all  could  such  a  practice  be  expected  to  have  any  place 
among  Christians  who  were  honored  with  official  responsibilities.  (2) 
That  the  reference  is  not  to  polygamy  is  indicated  by  the  fact,  that  the 
standing  of  the  enrolled  widow  is  made  dependent  on  her  having  been 
the  wife  of  one  man  ;  and  surely  the  writer  could  never  have  dreamed 
that  it  was  necessary  to  mention  polygamy  as  a  disqualification  for 
special  ecclesiastical  recognition.  (3)  It  is  improbable  that  the  direction 
relative  to  bishops  and  deacons  was  aimed  against  marital  infidelity, 
whether  in  the  form  of  divorce,  of  concubinage,  or  of  casual  fornication, 
since  the  obligation  to  avoid  these  practices  plainly  pertained  to  all  ranks 
of  Christians. 

In  reply  it  is  contended:  (i)  In  that  age  laxity  in  the  domestic  sphere 
was  a  crying  abuse.  There  was  very  little  conscience  in  heathen  society 
either  as  respects  divorce  or  concubinage.  Consequently  in  relation  to 
Christians  who  had  recently  come  out  of  heathenism  there  was  need  to 


268  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

of  ecclesiastical  organization.  It  seems  to  be  taken  for 
granted  that  the  churches  severally  will  have  bishops  and 
deacons.^  Mention  is  also  made  of  a  class  of  enrolled 
widows  in  a  way  which  indicates  that  they  were  employed 
in  the  service  of  the  Church .^  Elders  who  were  such 
in  an  official  sense  are  mentioned  both  in  First  Timothy 
and  in  Titus.  In  the  former  they  are  mentioned  as  rul- 
ing ;  teaching  is  also  specified  as  an  appropriate  function 
for  them,  and  it  is  declared  the  duty  of  the  congregation 
to  provide  for  their  support.^  In  the  latter  the  apostolic 
legate  is  directed  to  ordain  elders  in  every  city  ;  but  when 
it  comes  to  a  mention  of  their  necessary  qualifications 
the  name  of  bishop  is  substituted.  From  the  standpoint 
of  these  epistles  it  appears,  therefore,  that  a  plurality  of 
official  elders  belonged  to  each  church  or  Christian  com- 
munity, that  no  local  ecclesiastical  authority  was  superior 

lay  down  very  elementary  rules  for  the  safeguarding  of  domestic  virtue. 
(2)  The  rule  in  question  is  recorded  among  points  that  may  well  be  re- 
garded as  included  in  the  code  of  common  decency.  If  there  was  occa- 
sion to  direct  that  the  bishop  should  not  be  a  "  brawler  "  or  a  **  striker  " 
it  may  reasonably  be  supposed  that  there  was  occasion  to  direct  that  he 
should  avoid  a  laxity  in  domestic  relations  which  would  involve  a  virtual 
polygamy.  (3)  In  the  same  epistle  which  is  alleged  to  interpose  a  bar 
against  second  marriages  it  is  advised  that  the  younger  widows  should 
marry  (  i  Tim.  v,  14  ).  On  the  theory  that  a  second  marriage  was 
viewed  as  a  disqualification  for  enrollment  in  the  class  of  church  widows, 
this  would  be  advice  to  the  younger  widows  to  make  themselves  ineligible 
to  enrollment  should  they  be  again  widowed.  But  why  should  they  pay 
a  forfeit  for  doing  the  very  thing  incumbent  upon  them  ?  The  writer 
may  be  supposed  to  have  had  a  better  regard  for  consistency  than  ap- 
pears on  the  theory  that  he  wished  to  describe  second  marriages  as  a  bar 
to  honor  and  consideration  in  the  church. 

1 1  Tim.  iii.  1-13  ;  Tit.  1  5-9.  »  i  Tim.  v.  17-19. 

« I  Tim.  V.  3-16. 


THE  PAULINE  THEOLOGY  269 

to  them,  and  that  they  stand  for  the  same  class  otherwise 
mentioned  as  bishops.  As  Zahn  remarks,  **  It  is  the  same 
kind  of  church  constitution  to  which  the  Book  of  Acts 
witnesses  for  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor  in  the  lifetime 
of  Paul,  and  which  had  place,  according  to  the  Epistle  of 
Clement,  in  Rome  and  Corinth  at  the  end  of  the  first 
century,  and  still  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  century 
in  Philippi,  according  to  the  Epistle  of  Polycarp."  ^ 

1  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament,  I.  461,  462. 


CHAPTER  V 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  — HEBREWS  AND  FIRST 
PETER 

I.  —  Introductory  Considerations. 

The  assignment  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and 
the  First  Epistle  of  Peter  to  a  place  under  the  above 
heading  is  not  meant  by  any  means  to  indicate  that  these 
writings  can  be  described  as  echoes  or  copies  of  the 
Pauline  theology.  Due  stress  must  be  placed  upon  the 
first  member  of  the  heading.  Both  epistles  exhibit  a 
good  measure  of  independence  in  construing  the  Chris- 
tian teaching.  It  is  true,  nevertheless,  that  the  Pauline 
theology  is  to  be  rated  logically  and  historically  as  their 
antecedent. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  makes  the  Christian  uni- 
versalism,  for  which  Paul  had  contended,  an  underlying 
assumption.  It  asserts  also  as  great  a  preeminence  as 
did  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles  for  the  gospel  economy 
over  that  of  the  Old  Testament,  though  it  presents  that 
preeminence  under  a  quite  different  aspect.  Moreover 
its  christology,  while  developed  on  one  side  more  fully 
270 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  271 

than  the  Pauline,  takes  up  most  of  the  content  of  the 
latter.i 

In  First  Peter  there  is  a  less  distinct  approach  to  the 
Pauline  antithesis  between  the  two  dispensations  and 
also  a  less  complete  reproduction  of  the  Pauline  Chris- 
tology,  as  might  perhaps  be  expected  in  a  brief  com- 
munication, dominated  by  a  practical  purpose.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  there  are  special  turns  of  thought  and 
expression  in  the  epistle  which  seem  to  give  it  a  more 
direct  association  with  the  Pauline  writings  than  can  be 
asserted  for  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  A  list  of  these 
has  been  selected  as  follows  :  "  Having  been  begotten 
again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible." 
*'  He  that  suffered  in  the  flesh  hath  ceased  from  sin." 
"  As  free  and  not  using  your  freedom  for  a  cloak  of 
wickedness,  but  as  bondservants  of  God."  "  Because 
Christ  also  suffered  for  sins  once,  the  righteous  for  the 
unrighteous,  that  He  might  bring  us  to  God ;  being  put 
to  death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  in  the  spirit."  *'  For 
unto  this  end  was  the  gospel  preached  even  to  the  dead, 
that  they  might  be  judged  according  to  men  in  the  flesh, 
but  live  according  to  God  in  the  spirit."  "Who  His 
own  self  bore  our  sins  in  His  body  upon  the  tree,  that 

*  "  In  spite  of  its  divergences  from  the  standard  of  Pauline  author- 
ship, the  book  has  manifest  PauHne  affinities,  and  can  hardly  have  orig- 
inated beyond  the  Pauline  circle,  to  which  it  is  referred,  not  only  by 
the  author's  friendship  with  Timothy  (xiii.  23),  but  also  by  many  un- 
questionable echoes  of  the  Pauline  theology,  and  even  by  distinct  allu- 
sions to  passages  in  Paul's  epistles"  (W.  Robertson  Smith  and  H. 
von  Soden,  art.  Hebrews  in  Encyc.  Biblica).  The  points  of  affinity 
with  Ephesians  are  specially  numerous.  (For  the  list  see  Von  Soden, 
Hand-Kommentar.)  A  very  distinct  reminder  of  Paul  appears  in 
Heb.  V.  12-14  as  compared  with  i  Cor.  iii.  2. 


272  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

we  having  died  unto  sins  might  Hve  unto  righteous- 
ness." ^  The  points  of  correspondence  with  the  Pauline 
type  are  regarded  by  many  as  decisive  for  the  conclusion 
that  First  Peter  shows  acquaintance  with  Romans,^  and 
as  establishing  a  probability  that  its  composition  was 
also  influenced  by  Ephesians.^ 

The  authorship  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  remains 
a  matter  of  simple  conjecture.  No  happier  guess  is  likely 
to  be  made  than  that  which  Luther  expressed  when  he 
referred  it  to  Apollos.  The  traditional  view  that  Paul 
was  the  author  has  no  satisfactory  basis  in  history,  and 
is  unmistakably  excluded  by  the  tone  and  content  of  the 
writing.  As  was  noticed  in  another  connection,  the 
epistle  shows  the  hand  of  a  man  who  was  well  versed 
in  the  Jewish  Alexandrian  theology.*  To  call  him  a 
disciple  of  Philo  might  imply  too  much,  since  he  stood 
in  important  respects  upon  a  different  platform  of  relig- 
ious conceptions.  Still  he  shows  the  effect  of  his 
acquaintance  with  the  teaching  of  the  famous  Alexan- 
drian idealist. 

Almost  as  far  from  definite  solution  as  the  problem 
of  authorship  is  that  of  the  destination  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews.     A  considerable  proportion  of  recent 

*  McGiff  ert,  History  of  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age,  pp.  485, 
486. 

*  Compare  ii.  10  in  i  Pet.  with  ix.  25  in  Romans  ;  ii.  5  with  xii.  i ; 
i.  14  with  xii.  2;  iv.  7-1 1  with  xii.  3,6;  i.  22  with  xii.  9,  10;  iii.  8,9  with 
xiii.  16-18;  ii.  13-17  with  xiii.  i,  3,  4,  7. 

3  Compare  i.  3-5  in  i  Pet.  with  i.  3-14  in  Eph. ;  i.  12  with  iii.  5,  10; 
ii.  4-6  with  ii.  18-22;  ii.  18  with  vi.  5;  iii.  1-7  with  v.  22-33 ;  i"-  22 
with  i.  20-22. 

*  See  chap.  I,  sect.  3. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  273 

critics  incline  to  the  judgment  that  it  was  addressed  to 
a  limited  circle  of  readers,  to  a  single  community  of 
believers,  or  to  a  single  congregation  in  a  community. 
Several  favor  Rome  as  the  locality  of  the  congregation 
addressed.  To  this  judgment  there  is  little  reason  to 
take  exception.  The  epistle  gives  less  distinct  data  for 
locating  its  readers  than  for  pronouncing  on  their  char- 
acter. Quite  evidently  they  were  largely  of  Jewish  line- 
age, or  at  least  strongly  exposed  to  Jewish  influence. 
Whatever  special  items  may  be  cited  in  favor  of  their 
Gentile  character  and  relation  are  much  more  than  coun- 
terbalanced by  the  general  tone  and  content  of  the  epistle, 
with  its  elaborate  comparison  of  Christianity  with  Juda- 
ism and  earnest  contention  for  the  lofty  superiority  of 
the  former.^ 

On  the  side  of  external  evidence  there  is  no  special 
occasion  to  challenge  the  Petrine  authorship  of  First 
Peter.  In  respect  of  internal  evidence  two  things  in 
particular  have  been  alleged  against  its  composition  by 
the  apostle.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  said  that  the  picture 
that  is  given  of  the  persecution  to  which  those  addressed 
were  exposed,  and  especially  the  representation  of  their 
liability  to  suffer  as  Ch'istiajiSy  is  indicative  of  a  scheme 
of  judicial  procedure  against  the  confessed  followers  of 
Christ,  and  so  points  to  a  later  date  than  the  lifetime  of 
the  apostle.  In  the  second  place,  it  is  claimed  that  it 
is  contrary  to  the  probabilities  of  the  case  that  a  leader 
among  the  original  apostles  should  give  such  clear  evi- 
dence as  this  epistle  contains  of  being  influenced  by 
Paul,  and  so  little  token  of  a  vital  reminiscence  of  the 

1  Compare  Menegoz,  Westcott,  Bruce,  and  Peake. 


274  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

words  and  deeds  of  Christ.  In  response  to  the  former 
objection  it  is  maintained  that  the  language  of  the  epistle 
does  not  necessarily  imply  a  regular  scheme  of  judicial 
procedure  against  the  Christians  as  such.  The  terms 
of  the  description  are  sufficiently  met  if  we  suppose  that 
the  Christians  addressed  were  subject  because  of  their 
faith  to  ill-will  and  slander,  and  consequently  were  ex- 
posed in  many  instances  to  a  wrongful  infliction  of  pains 
and  penalties.  Suspicion,  ill-will,  and  slanderous  accu- 
sation were  quite  competent  to  make  them  suffer  "  as 
Christians,"  apart  from  a  regular  scheme  of  judicial 
procedure  against  them  on  the  score  of  their  religion. 
Harnack  admits  that  the  references  to  persecution,  while 
they  make  it  probable  that  the  epistle  was  not  composed 
before  the  years  83-93,  do  not  exclude  the  possibility  of 
its  having  been  written  one  or  two  decades  earlier.^  In 
reply  to  the  other  objection  it  is  claimed  that  there  is  no 
antecedent  assurance  that  an  apostle,  addressing  a  brief 
communication  to  a  body  of  disciples  who  had  already 
been  instructed  in  the  rudiments  of  Christianity,  would 
occupy  himself  with  reproducing  details  of  the  gospel 
history  rather  than  with  inductions  from  that  history  as 
a  whole.  It  is  claimed  also  that  the  epistle  which  bears 
the  name  of  Peter  is  not  destitute  of  tokens  of  a  remi- 
niscence of  Christ's  words.^  Furthermore,  it  is  con- 
tended that  there  is  nothing  incredible  in  the  supposition 
that  Peter  may  have  recognized  the  eminence  of  Paul  in 

1  Die  Chronologie  der  altchristlichen  Literatur,  I.  454. 

2  Compare  i.  4  with  Matt.  xxv.  34;  i.  10  ff.  with  Luke  x.  24;  i.  13 
with  Luke  xii.  35  ;  ii.  7  with  Matt,  xxi.  42 ;  iii.  9  with  Luke  vi.  28;  iii. 
14  with  Matt.  V.  10 ;  v.  3  with  Matt.  xx.  25,  26;  v.  6  with  Matt,  xxiii.  12. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  275 

theological  construction,  and  may  have  so  far  familiarized 
himself  with  some  of  his  epistles  as  to  have  carried  over 
into  his  own  composition  somewhat  of  a  Pauline  coloring. 
It  is  noticeable  that  as  far  back  as  the  first  stages  of  the 
controversy  over  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  Judaism 
Peter  held  a  mediating  position  between  the  school  of 
Paul  and  that  of  James.  The  advance  of  Christianity 
in  the  Gentile  world  and  the  broadening  of  his  own  ex- 
perience would  tend  naturally  to  narrow  rather  than  to 
widen  the  interval  between  him  and  the  Pauline  platform. 
It  is  to  be  observed,  too,  that  the  epistle  in  question  is 
no  specimen  of  out  and  out  Paulinism.  As  opposed  to 
the  speculative  boldness  of  Paul  it  is  nearer  to  the  dog- 
matic reserve  of  the  first  part  of  the  Book  of  Acts, 
though  doubtless  making  a  considerable  advance  upon 
the  teaching  of  that  portion  of  the  New  Testament. 

A  subordinate  objection  has  been  based  on  the  lin- 
guistic characteristics  of  the  epistle,  the  allegation  being 
that  it  is  improbable  that  a  man  of  Peter's  antecedents 
should  have  been  able  to  handle  the  Greek  language  with 
the  measure  of  skill  exhibited  in  this  writing.  This  con- 
sideration, however,  is  not  very  formidable.  If  it  be 
supposed  that  the  apostle  in  the  course  of  a  long  ministry 
failed  to  reach  any  considerable  proficiency  in  the  use  of 
the  Greek  language,  there  is  nothing  in  the  way  of  the 
conclusion  that  he  was  well  served  in  this  matter  by  his 
secretary  Silvanus. 

The  assumption  of  a  relation  of  literary  dependence 
between  First  Peter  and  the  Epistle  of  James  cannot 
properly  be  regarded  as  prejudicing  the  claim  of  the 
former  to  a  Petrine  origin.     This  is  true  even  if  the 


2^6  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Epistle  of  James  be  accounted  a  post-apostolic  writing, 
since  critical  authority  cannot  be  said  to  be  committed 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  literary  dependence  was  on 
the  side  of  First  Peter.^ 

Whether  written  by  an  apostle  or  not,  First  Peter 
must  be  regarded  as  in  content  worthy  of  apostolic 
authorship.  A  judgment  to  this  effect  is  given  by  Har- 
nack.  Though  interpreting  the  internal  evidence  against 
the  supposition  of  Petrine  authorship,  he  pronounces  the 
hypothesis  of  falsification  by  the  writer  incongruous  with 
the  character  of  the  epistle  as  a  whole.  The  attachment 
of  Peter's  name  to  it  must  be  imputed  to  a  different 
hand  from  that  of  its  author.  Should  the  contrary  con- 
clusion be  adopted,  it  would  be  best,  in  spite  of  the  diffi- 
culties which  stand  in  the  way  of  assigning  it  to  the 
apostle,  to  confess  him  as  the  author .^ 

A  motive  for  not  coupling  the  second  epistle  bearing 
the  name  of  Peter  with  the  first,  as  a  subject  for  special 
examination,  is  found  in  its  diverse  content  and  also  in 
the  serious  grounds  which  exist  for  doubting  its  right  to 
be  reckoned  in  any  proper  sense  as  an  apostolic  writing. 
A  large  proportion  of  New  Testament  critics  unhesitat- 
ingly pronounce  it  a  pseudonymous,  post-apostolic  com- 
position. It  is  true  that  a  scholar  of  the  eminence  of 
Zahn  considers  it  possible  to  defend  its  Petrine  author- 
ship.    But  he  helps  himself  out  with  so  many  hypotheses 

1  Points  of  resemblance  between  the  two  epistles  may  be  seen  by 
comparing  in  particular  i  Pet.  i.  i  with  James  i.  i ;  i.  6,  7  with  i.  2-4, 
12 ;  i.  23  with  i.  18 ;  ii.  i  with  i.  21 ;  ii.  ii  with  iv.  i ;  v.  6  with  iv.  7,  10 ; 
V.  9  with  iv.  7. 

2  Chronologie,  I.  464. 


MODIFIED   PAULINISM  277 

that  his  argument  affords  but  a  paltry  ground  of  confi- 
dence. To  explain  the  wide  difference  between  the 
style  and  tone  of  the  two  epistles  ascribed  to  Peter  he 
supposes  that,  in  the  composition  of  First  Peter,  Silvanus 
did  much  more  than  serve  as  a  mere  scribe,  that  in  fact 
his  aid  was  so  far  utilized  as  to  give  the  writing  which 
he  penned  a  special  coloring,  whereas  in  writing  Second 
Peter  the  apostle  may  have  depended  upon  his  own  re- 
sources. He  supposes  further,  since  Second  Peter  refers 
to  a  former  epistle,  and  this  on  the  basis  of  the  descrip- 
tion given  cannot  be  identified  with  First  Peter,  that 
the  apostle  wrote  to  the  particular  circle  of  readers  ad- 
dressed in  Second  Peter  an  epistle  which  has  not  been 
transmitted.  Once  more  he  supposes,  inasmuch  as 
Second  Peter  refers  to  a  communication  from  Paul,  that 
this  apostle  wrote  to  the  same  circle  of  readers  an  epistle 
of  which  nothing  is  known  aside  from  this  incidental 
mention. 1  Now,  a  conclusion  that  calls  for  so  many 
hypotheses  that  swing  in  the  air  is  evidently  not  very 
well  secured,  especially  as  it  has  to  face  the  fact  that 
Second  Peter  is  essentially  unsupported  by  external  evi- 
dence and  contains  marks  of  a  relatively  late  origin. 
One  of  these  marks  is  the  manner  in  which  the  writer 
responds  to  an  occasion  for  explaining  the  delay  of 
Christ's  coming.  What  we  know  of  the  attitude  of 
vivid  expectancy  in  the  apostolic  age  would  not  lead  us 
to  presume  that  a  representative  of  that  era  would  re- 
mind his  readers  that  a  thousand  years  with  the  Lord 
are  as  one  day.  Another  mark  of  the  same  order  is  the 
classification  which  is  made  of  Paul's  writings  with  "  the 
other  Scriptures."     Even  if  the  term  "  Scriptures  "  in 

1  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament,  Vol.  II. 


2/8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

this  connection  is  made  exclusive  of  the  canonical  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  and  regarded  as  signifying  a  col- 
lection of  apostolic  writings,  the  statement  is  a  token  of 
a  relatively  late  date,  since  it  indicates  a  consciousness 
that  a  considerable  body  of  apostolic  literature  was  open 
to  the  perusal  of  Christians.  Still  another  mark  of  a 
comparatively  late  date  will  need  to  be  admitted  if  it  be 
concluded  that  Second  Peter  shows  dependence  upon  the 
Epistle  of  Jude.  The  latter  quite  distinctly  adopts  a 
post-apostolic  standpoint  in  the  exhortation :  **  Remem- 
ber ye  the  words  which  have  been  spoken  before  by  the 
apostles  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  how  they  said  to  you. 
In  the  last  times  there  shall  be  mockers,  walking  after 
their  own  ungodly  lusts."  Scholars  are  not  indeed 
unanimous  in  holding  that  the  priority  belongs  to  Jude ; 
but  not  a  few  are  very  decidedly  committed  to  that  alter- 
native.^ 

Adding  a  word  in  respect  of  contents,  we  note  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  fall  and  punishment  of  a  portion  of 
the  angelic  host  is  characteristic  of  both  Jude  and 
Second  Peter ;  that  the  leading  motive  of  the  former  is 
to  excoriate  a  species  of  Gnostic  libertinism ;  that  the 
latter  devotes  one  of  its  chapters  to  the  accomplishment 
of  the  same  purpose;  that  peculiar  to  Second  Peter  is 
the  doctrine  of  the  destruction  of  the  world  by  fire. 

II.  —  The  Conception  of  God  in  Hebrews  and 

First  Peter. 
The  description  of  God  in  Hebrews  is  very  much  after 

1  So  Harnack,  Jiilicher,  Von  Soden,  Holtzmann,  Beyschlag,  Weiss, 
Moffatt,  Bacon,  Chase,  and  Plumptre.  Zahn  and  Spitta  assume  the 
priority  of  Second  Peter. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  279 

the  Old  Testament  order  as  placing  great  stress  upon 
His  transcendence  and  intensity.  He  is  represented  as 
the  Majesty  enthroned  on  high.^  The  High  Priest  who 
comes  before  Him  to  serve  as  the  advocate  of  men  must 
pass  through  the  heavens  and  be  made  higher  than  the 
heavens.2  While  thus  immeasurably  uplifted,  God  has 
no  touch  of  indifference  in  His  disposition.  He  is  thor- 
oughly the  living  God.  There  is  no  creature  that  is  not 
manifest  in  His  sight.  All  things  are  naked  and  open 
before  His  eyes.  His  word  is  living  and  active  and 
sharper  than  a  two-edged  sword.^  There  is  no  escape 
for  the  one  that  treats  lightly  the  salvation  which  He 
proffers.*  His  vengeance  shadows  him  who  profanes 
holy  things,  and  it  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  His 
hands.^  He  is  a  consuming  fire.^  Without  sanctifica- 
tion  no  man  shall  see  Him."  Judgment  is  wholly  with 
Him.^  At  least,  the  epistle  names  Him  the  judge  of  all, 
and  gives  no  hint  that  the  Son,  in  addition  to  the  office 
of  mediation,  fulfills  also  that  of  judging  men. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  gracious  and  amiable  side  of 
God's  character  is  brought  into  view.  It  is  by  the  grace 
of  God  that  the  Mediator  tastes  death  for  every  man, 
and  the  design  of  His  sacrifice  is  the  bringing  of  many 
sons  unto  glory.  In  virtue  of  the  great  redemptive 
transaction  the  throne  of  majesty  becomes  a  throne  of 
grace  to  which  men  are  invited  to  draw  near  even  with 
boldness.^  The  one  who  accepts  the  new  covenant 
comes  not  to  the  mount  that  burned  with  fire,  and  was 


1  Heb.  i.  3,  viii.  I. 

*  iii.  2-3. 

7  xii.  14. 

2  iv.  14,  vii.  26. 

6  X.  30,  31. 

8  xii.  23. 

»iv.  12,  13. 

*  xii.  29. 

»  iv.  16. 

280  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

compassed  about  with  blackness  and  darkness  and  tem- 
pest, but  to  mount  Zion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the  hving 
God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem. ^  God  is  to  him  a  Father, 
who  it  may  be  chastens,  but  in  love  and  for  the  purpose 
of  amendment  and  profit. ^  Tribute  is  thus  rendered  in 
strong  terms  to  the  divine  fatherhood.  Yet  it  must  be 
confessed  that  the  balance  of  emphasis  is  on  the  side  of 
majesty  and  ethical  intensity.  It  is  with  the  great  High 
Priest  that  the  qualities  of  gentleness  and  compassion 
are  more  directly  and  fully  associated. 

The  epistle  of  Peter  recurs  less  distinctly  than  Hebrews 
to  the  Old  Testament  conceptions  of  God's  loftiness  and 
energy  of  righteous  will.  It  intimates  indeed  that  the 
holiness  of  God  makes  very  high  demands,  insomuch 
that  the  righteous  is  scarcely  saved. ^  But  in  general  it 
presents  the  friendly  and  compassionate  side  of  divine 
character  and  relationship.  God  is  represented  as  the 
Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  according  to  His 
great  mercy  inspires  to  a  living  hope  through  the  resur- 
rection of  Christ ;  as  the  Father  who  judges  without 
respect  of  persons  ;  as  the  gracious  Lord  ;  as  the  faithful 
Creator ;  and  as  the  God  of  all  grace.* 

III.  —  Hints  on  the  Nature  and  Rank  of  Men 
AND  Angels. 

The  language  of  Heb.  iv.  12  is  somewhat  favorable  to 
the  supposition  that  the  author  entertained  the  trichot- 
omist  theory,  and  conceived  of  the  soul  as  truly  distinct 

1  Heb.  xii.  18-25.  ^  i  Pet.  iv.  18. 

2  xii.  7-11.  4  I  Pet.  i.  3,  17,  ii.  3,  iv.  19,  v.  10 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  281 

from  the  spirit.  The  fact  also  that  he  speaks  of  the 
spirit  as  though  he  considered  it  to  be  the  part  of  man 
relating  him  to  a  divine  and  eternal  sphere  may  be  cited 
for  the  same  supposition .^  But,  on  the  other  hand, 
there  are  grounds  for  inferring  that  he  did  not  distin- 
guish fundamentally  between  soul  and  spirit,  and  con- 
joined them  in  the  instance  referred  to  above  for  a 
rhetorical  purpose,  namely,  the  more  strikingly  to  en- 
force the  truth  that  the  searching  and  discriminating 
function  of  the  word  of  God  extends  to  every  part  of 
man's  interior  being.  Several  times  he  mentions  the 
soul  in  connections  which  suggest  that  the  term  was 
designed  to  be  inclusive  of  the  highest  in  man.^  In 
First  Peter  the  use  of  "soul"  in  the  higher  and  more 
comprehensive  sense  is  quite  apparent.  While  there 
is  in  the  epistle  something  of  the  Pauline  antithesis  be- 
tween flesh  and  spirit,  it  departs  from  Pauline  phrase- 
ology in  speaking  of  fleshly  lusts  as  antagonizing,  not 
the  spirit,  but  the  soul.^ 

There  is  more  of  an  association  of  human  sinfulness 
with  the  flesh  in  First  Peter*  than  in  Hebrews;  but 
neither  exhibits  the  Pauline  stress  upon  this  point  of 
view.  Both  are  without  any  distinct  doctrine  of  inher- 
ent or  inherited  depravity,  while  both  reveal  a  lively 
sense  of  human  weakness  and  temptability.  Some  pas- 
sages in  Hebrews  convey  the  impression  that  the  author 
was  disposed  to  regard  infirmities  rather  than  downright 
perversity  as  generally  characteristic  of  men.^     Yet  it 

1  Heb.  xii.  9,  23.  *  i  Pet.  iv.  1-6. 

2  Heb.  vi.  19,  X.  39,  xiii.  17.  ^  Heb.  iv.  15,  xii.  i. 
*  I  Pet.  ii.  II.     See  also  i.  9,  22,  ii.  25,  iv.  19. 


282  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

would  be  hasty  to  draw  a  positive  conclusion  from  this 
line  of  representation,  since  the  writer  makes  no  attempt 
to  paint  the  state  of  the  world  beyond  the  circle  of  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  revelations. 

A  double  measuring  scale  of  man's  worth  and  rank 
is  supplied  by  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  On  the  one 
hand  we  have  such  a  means  of  estimate  as  is  contained 
in  the  picture  of  the  divine  relationship  of  men — their 
sonship  toward  God,  their  oneness  with  Christ  and  ac- 
knowledgment by  Him  as  brethren,  their  inclusion  under 
the  terms  of  a  covenant  instituted  through  the  self-obla- 
tion of  the  Son  of  God  and  made  effectual  through  His 
perpetual  priesthood.  On  the  other  hand,  we  have  the 
comparison  of  man's  position  with  that  of  angels.  In  one 
aspect  he  is  a  little  lower  than  the  angels.^  Whether  this 
is  because  of  his  subjection  to  vanity  in  a  state  of  mor- 
tality, or  because  of  a  more  substantial  difference,  is  not 
stated.  In  another  aspect  he  seems  to  be  awarded  the 
superior  consideration.  Angels  are  all  ministering  spirits 
sent  forth  to  do  ser\ice  for  the  sake  of  them  that  shall 
inherit  salvation.^  Ministering  is  not  indeed  from  the 
New  Testament  point  of  view  a  sure  token  of  subordinate 
rank,  since  Christ  Himself  is  said  to  have  come  to  min- 
ister, and  in  our  epistle  the  entertainment  of  a  minister 
of  the  angelic  order  is  depicted  as  a  special  honor  and 
piece  of  good  fortune.^  But  if  we  unite  with  the  minis- 
terial position  of  angels  the  two  other  considerations,  that 
man  was  constituted  only  a  little  lower  than  the  angelic 
rank,  and  is  destined  after  the  pattern  of  Christ,  far  tran- 
scending his  earthly  condition,  to  be  exalted  to  glory  and 

1  Heb.  ii.  7.  *  i.  14.  "  xiii.  2. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  283 

honor,  the  condusion  hes  very  near  at  hand  that  he  has 
no  reason  to  envy  angels,  even  if  he  has  no  calling  to 
boast  of  superiority  over  them.  In  the  Petrine  epistle 
an  identical  means  of  measuring  man's  rank  is  given  on 
the  side  of  his  divine  association ;  and,  while  the  relation 
of  angels  to  men  is  not  directly  commented  upon,  they 
are  described  as  interested  students  of  the  gospel  dispen- 
sation.^ 

It  cannot  properly  be  doubted  that  the  writer  of  He- 
brews regarded  angels  as  personal  beings.  The  words, 
*'  Who  maketh  His  angels  winds  and  His  ministers  a 
flame  of  fire,"^  cannot  be  put  in  evidence  for  a  contrary 
conclusion.  The  author  could  not  have  thought  it  worth 
while  to  compare  Christ  to  mere  natural  forces  and  to 
emphasize  His  superiority  to  them.  The  words  in  ques- 
tion picture  the  changeful  forms  of  manifestation  which 
were  represented  in  Jewish  thought  to  be  characteristic 
of  angels.  In  all  further  reference  to  them  there  is  a 
sufficiently  clear  assumption  of  their  personality.  They 
are  described  as  agents  of  the  old  covenant  as  well  as 
ministers  under  the  new,^  and  are  said  to  constitute  in- 
numerable hosts  alongside  the  general  assembly  and 
church  of  the  firstborn.*  Of  evil  angels  there  is  no  men- 
tion either  in  Hebrews  or  First  Peter,  except  that  in  a 
single  instance  each  epistle  makes  reference  to  the  devil.^ 
The  designation  of  the  devil  as  the  one  having  the  power 
of  death  was  probably  dictated  by  the  thought  that  sin  at 
once  stands  in  causative  relation  to  death  and  gives  to  it 

1 1  Pet.  i.  12.  4  Heb.  xii.  22,  23. 

2  Heb.  i.  7.  5  Heb.  u.  14  ;  i  Pet.  v.  8. 

8  Heb.  u.  2. 


284  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

its  aspect  of  terror.     The  evil  personality  is  credited  with 
the  office  of  the  sin  which  he  fosters. 


IV.  —  The  Person  of  Christ. 

In  describing  the  transcendence  and  glory  of  the  pre- 
incarnate  Son  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  vies  with  the 
later  Epistles  of  Paul  and  reaches  essentially  to  the  level 
of  the  prologue  to  John's  Gospel.  Its  characterization 
of  Him  as  the  effulgence  of  the  Father's  glory  and  the 
express  image  of  His  substance  constitutes  as  distinct  an 
affirmation  of  metaphysical  sonship  as  can  be  found  in 
the  New  Testament.  In  harmony  with  this  conception 
of  substantial  likeness  the  epistle  does  not  hesitate  to 
apply  to  the  Son  the  divine  name  —  not  only  that  of 
Lord,  but  that  of  God  as  well.^  It  also  assigns  to  Him 
cosmic  relations  that  are  thoroughly  of  a  divine  order. 
In  the  beginning  He  laid  the  foundations  of  the  earth, 
and  the  heavens  are  the  works  of  His  hands.  He  up- 
holds all  things  by  the  word  of  His  power.  He  is  an 
object  of  worship  to  the  highest  ranks  of  created  intelli- 
gences. As  He  is  before  all  things,  so  He  is  above  the 
plane  of  the  mutation  and  transitoriness  to  which  they 
are  exposed.  They  shall  wax  old  as  doth  a  garment,  but 
His  years  change  not.  "  Jesus  Christ  is  the  same  yes- 
terday, and  to-day,  yea,  and  for  ever."^ 

With  the  divine  transcendence  of  Christ  the  epistle 
conjoins  a  thoroughly  human  character.  Indeed  the  dis- 
tinctive feature  of  its  christology  is  the  unstinted  recog- 

1  Heb.  i.  8.  2  Heb.  xiii.  8. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  285 

nition  which  it  accords  to  the  complete  humanity  of 
Christ,  in  spite  of  the  lofty  predicates  with  which  it 
clothes  Him.  It  goes  here  quite  beyond  all  parallel  in 
the  New  Testament.  The  Gospels  indeed  afford  in  su- 
perior measure  the  materials  for  a  picture  of  the  human 
Christ,  but  it  is  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  which  di- 
rectly discourses  upon  and  emphasizes  His  community  in 
nature  and  experience  with  men.  According  to  its  rep- 
resentation in  one  respect  only  does  He  stand  apart  from 
men.  While  they  are  sinners,  He  is  holy,  guileless,  un- 
defiled,  perfectly  without  sin.^  Like  the  rest  of  the 
children  He  partakes  of  flesh  and  blood,  and  so  comes 
under  the  power  of  death.  In  all  things  He  is  made  like 
unto  His  brethren.  He  is  tempted  in  all  points  like  as 
we  are,  and  suffers  in  being  tempted.  He  feels  buffeted 
and  pierced  by  the  gainsaying  of  sinners.  In  the  days 
of  His  flesh  He  offers  up  prayers  and  supplications  with 
strong  crying  and  tears.  To  Him,  as  to  others.  His 
trials  and  burdens  are  a  means  of  development  and  of 
equipment  for  His  vocation.  He  learns  obedience  — 
brings  to  an  ideal  stage  the  spirit  of  obedience  —  by  the 
things  which  He  suffers.  He  is  perfected  also  by  His 
sufferings  in  respect  of  sympathy,  and  becomes  thus  a 
high  priest  that  can  be  touched  with  the  feeling  of  our 
infirmities.  And  all  this  treasure  of  human  sympathy 
and  brotherly  feeling  He  carries  into  the  perpetual  office 
of  intercession  which  He  fulfills  for  men  in  the  heavenly 
sanctuary  .2 

How  did  the  author  of  Hebrews  reconcile  the  tran- 

1  Heb.  iv.  15,  vii.  26. 

2  See  Heb.  ii.  10, 14-18,  iv.  15,  v.  7,  8,  vii.  25,  xii.  2-4. 


286  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

scendence  of  Christ  with  this  complete  implication  in 
human  experience  ?  He  does  not  attempt  to  reconcile 
the  two,  any  more  than  the  evangelists  attempt  to  con- 
strue the  unity  of  Christ's  consciousness  with  its  human 
and  its  superhuman  content.  The  religious  mind  as 
such  does  not  regard  a  reconciliation  as  of  the  first  con- 
sequence. It  finds  its  needs  gloriously  met  in  one 
whom  it  can  contemplate  as  both  brother  and  Lord, 
near  by  kinship  of  nature  and  yet  mighty  to  save.  It 
rests  in  the  assurance  that  such  a  Saviour  has  been  made 
known,  and  treats  as  a  quite  secondary  matter  the  theo- 
retic exposition  of  His  personality. 

The  christological  data  furnished  by  First  Peter  are 
much  less  ample  than  those  contained  in  Hebrews. 
There  is,  however,  a  probable  reference  to  the  preexist- 
ence  of  Christ  in  the  statement  that  His  spirit  was 
operative  in  the  prophets,  and  also  in  the  reference  to 
His  being  manifested  at  the  end  of  the  times.^  A  hint 
of  the  transcendent  rank  of  the  ascended  Christ  is  given 
in  the  declaration  that  angels,  authorities,  and  powers 
are  made  subject  to  Him.^  Furthermore,  the  title 
"  Lord "  is  ascribed  to  Him.^  According  to  the  text 
approved  by  the  revisers.  Christians  are  exhorted  to 
sanctify  Him  in  their  hearts  as  Lord.* 

V.  —  The  High-Priestly  Work  of  Christ. 

Quite  beyond  the  example  of  any  other  New  Testa- 
ment writing,  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  illustrates  the 
work  of  Christ  by  reference  to  the  Old  Testament  ritual. 

1  I  Pet.  i.  II.  20.  2  iii.  22.  8  ii.  2.  *  iv.  15. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  287 

After  the  manner  of  the  Alexandrian  typology  it  con- 
templates the  ancient  tabernacle  and  its  ministry  and 
rites  as  copies  of  things  in  the  heavens.  They  are 
shadows  belonging  to  a  preliminary  dispensation.  The 
realities  for  which  they  stand  are  disclosed  through  the 
new  dispensation.  Here  faith  is  directed  to  the  holy 
place  made  without  hands,  to  the  enduring  High  Priest, 
to  the  sacrifice  which  is  truly  effective  to  put  away  sin. 

The  author's  consciousness  of  the  superiority  of  the 
Christian  over  the  Judaic  system  was  evidently  as  pro- 
nounced as  was  that  of  Paul.  But  his  way  of  illustrating 
the  superiority  is  quite  different.  The  two  writers  view 
Old  Testament  law  from  a  different  angle.  Paul  con- 
siders it  as  a  body  of  commandments  which  collide  with 
the  natural  impulses  of  men,  bring  their  inherent  sinful- 
ness to  manifestation,  work  in  them  a  sense  of  their 
bondage  and  incapacity  to  accomplish  self-salvation,  and 
thus  prepare  them  in  the  exercise  of  self-surrendering 
faith  to  avail  themselves  of  the  grace  and  power  of  a 
Divine  Deliverer.  As  the  apostle  puts  it,  the  law  is  a 
schoolmaster  to  bring  men  to  Christ.  To  the  writer  of 
Hebrews,  on  the  other  hand,  the  law  is  preeminently  a 
code  of  ritual,  a  scheme  of  provisions  for  expiating  or 
covering  sins  and  for  opening  up  an  approach  for  sin- 
stained  men  to  the  holy  God.  Its  aim  is  the  same  as 
that  which  belongs  to  the  agencies  of  the  gospel  dispen- 
sation. The  ground  for  disparaging  it  is  its  comparative 
inefficacy.  As  having  but  the  shadow  of  good  things  to 
come  it  can  never  make  perfect  them  that  draw  nigh. 

Along  with  this  contrast  there  is  a  somewhat  remark- 
able item  of  parallelism  between  Paul  and  the  author  of 


388  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

our  epistle  in  dealing  with  Old  Testament  precedent. 
As  the  former,  going  back  of  the  Mosaic  legislation, 
finds  in  Abraham  an  example  of  the  gospel  method,  in- 
asmuch as  the  faith  of  the  patriarch  was  reckoned  unto 
him  for  righteousness,  so  the  latter,  going  back  of  the 
Levitical  system,  finds  in  Melchizedek  a  type  of  the  ex- 
traordinary priesthood  exemplified  in  Christ.  Either 
representation  was  evidently  fitted  to  do  good  service  in 
an  ad  hommein  argument  with  those  disposed  to  contend 
for  the  perpetuity  and  exclusive  right  of  the  Mosaic 
institutions. 

In  construing  the  work  of  Christ  the  writer  of 
Hebrews  does  not  overlook  or  lightly  value  His  sacri- 
ficial death.  It  is  very  noticeable,  however,  that  he 
regards  the  priestly  office  of  Christ  as  rather  being  ini- 
tiated by  His  death  than  finding  therein  its  conclusion. 
As  in  the  old  economy  the  slaying  of  the  victim  did  not 
so  much  complete  the  rite  of  atonement  as  provide  its 
necessary  basis,  so  is  it  in  the  great  transaction  which 
the  ancient  rite  foreshadowed.  By  His  death,  wherein 
He  is  at  once  offerer  and  victim,  Christ  makes  the  neces- 
sary preparation  for  fulfilling  in  the  heavenly  sanctuary 
His  high-priestly  vocation.  According  to  a  figurative  de- 
scription which  greatly  taxes  interpretation.  He  cleanses 
the  belongings  of  that  sanctuary  by  His  blood. ^    A  more 

1  Heb.  ix.  22,  23.  Perhaps  the  best  justice  is  done  to  this  statement 
if  it  be  understood  to  denote  that,  inasmuch  as  the  heavenly  sanctuary 
through  the  presence  of  Christ  exhibits  the  tokens  of  an  accomplished 
propitiation,  it  is  made  fitting  on  God's  part  to  tolerate  the  approach 
thereto  of  the  sin-stained,  as  well  as  appropriate  on  their  part  to  assume 
to  draw  near.  The  guilt  of  the  sinner,  it  may  be  said,  does  not  proclaim 
exclusion  from  heaven,  since  here  the  memorials  of  a  propitiatory  offer- 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  289 

intelligible  description  of  His  priestly  office  in  the 
heavenly  sphere  is  contained  in  the  declaration,  He  is 
able  to  save  unto  the  uttermost  them  that  draw  near 
unto  God  through  Him,  seeing  He  ever  liveth  to  make 
intercession  for  them.^  It  is  not  necessary,  doubtless, 
to  understand  this  intercession  in  the  most  literal  way. 
The  presence  of  Christ  at  the  throne  of  God  in  the 
nature  in  which  He  suffered  is  a  perpetual  memorial  of 
His  sacrifice,  and  has  thus  the  virtue  of  a  perpetual 
request  for  grace  toward  those  for  whom  the  sacrifice 
was  made. 

The  imaginative  and  figurative  style  of  the  epistle 
renders  it  somewhat  difficult  to  determine  just  how  the 
author  conceived  of  the  relation  of  Christ's  work  to 
human  salvation.  But  the  evidence  is,  in  our  view,  suf- 
ficient to  warrant  the  conclusion  that,  like  Paul,  he  joined 

ing  testify  that  his  guilt  is  covered.  It  is  made  thus  a  place  cleansed 
from  obstacles  to  cordial  communion  between  God  and  any  believing 
soul  that  has  a  will  to  seek  the  divine  presence.  An  interpretation  very 
nearly  identical  -with  this  is  contained  in  the  following  comment  of 
Peake :  "  What  is  meant  by  the  cleansing  of  the  heavenly  sanctuary 
must  be  determined  by  its  meaning  as  applied  to  the  earthly.  The 
ritual  of  the  Day  of  Atonement  was  designed  not  merely  to  atone  for 
the  sins  of  the  people,  but  to  make  atonement  for  the  sanctuary  itself. 
The  sense  of  this  would  seem  to  be  that  the  constant  sin  of  Israel  had 
communicated  a  certain  uncleanness  to  the  sanctuary.  Similarly  the 
sin  of  mankind  might  be  supposed  to  have  cast  its  shadow  even  into 
heaven.  It  hung  like  a  thick  curtain  between  God  and  man,  preventing 
free  fellowship,  and  that  not  only  because  it  defiled  the  conscience,  so 
that  man  was  ill  at  ease  with  God,  but  because  it  intruded  a  disturbing 
element  into  the  life  of  God  Himself.  Looking  at  it  from  a  somewhat 
different  point  of  view,  w^e  might  take  the  cleansing  to  be  identical  with 
the  removal  of  the  veil  in  the  heavenly  sanctuary,  since  cleansing  is  for 
the  sake  of  access."  (New  Century  Bible,  Hebrews,  p.  191.) 
1  Heb.  vii.  25. 


290  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

an  objective  with  a  subjective  aspect,  making  the  sacrifice 
of  the  great  High  Priest  in  some  sense  a  condition  of  the 
remission  of  sins  as  well  as  a  practical  expedient  for  im- 
parting moral  and  religious  incentive.  This  conclusion 
is  favored  by  the  general  office  which  he  attaches  to 
sacrifice.  Possibly,  as  Menegoz  contends,  his  thought 
on  this  theme  approached  less  closely  than  that  of  Paul 
to  the  idea  of  substitutionary  suffering.^  Still  he  evi- 
dently conceived  of  sacrifice  as  having  distinct  connection 
with  the  remission  of  sins,  so  that  when  it  has  laid  a 
basis  for  remission  it  is  no  longer  needed,  and  where 
remission  is  excluded  because  of  the  wilfulness  and 
enormity  of  the  sin  it  has  no  place.^  The  same  conclu- 
sion is  approved  by  the  direct  association  which  is  made 
between  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  and  the  remission  or 
putting  away  of  sins.  It  is  mentioned  in  several  in- 
stances as  though  in  a  summary  way  and  once  for  all  it 
had  taken  the  ban  off  from  sinners  and  provided  for 
their  access  to  God.  Christ,  it  is  said,  sat  down  at  the 
right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high  when  He  had  made 
purification  of  sins.^  Through  His  own  blood  He 
entered  once  for  all  into  the  holy  place,  having  obtained 
eternal  redemption.*  Once  at  the  end  of  the  ages  He 
was  manifested  to  put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of 
Himself.^  He  was  once  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of 
many.^  When  He  had  offered  one  sacrifice  for  sins  for 
ever  He  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God."     What 

1  La  Theologie  de  I'Epitre  aux  Hebreux,  pp.  183,  184. 

2  Heb.  V.  1,3,  ix.  22,  x.  17,  18,  26.  ^  ix.  26. 
8  Heb.  i.  3.  6  ix.  28. 
*  ix.  12.  '  X.  12 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  291 

less  could  the  author  have  meant  by  statements  like 
these  than  that  the  gracious  economy  in  which  sins  are 
remitted  and  access  to  God  enjoyed  is  founded  upon  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ.  Furthermore,  he  seems  to  attach 
an  objective  value  of  this  kind  to  Christ's  work  when  he 
includes  in  His  high-priestly  vocation  the  making  of  a 
propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  people.^ 

In  its  portrayal  of  the  subjective  bearing  of  Christ's 
work  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  falls  in  some  respects 
below  the  Pauline  representation.  It  does  not  bring  out 
the  notion  of  mystical  union  with  the  crucified  One  and 
of  spiritual  transformation  through  His  indwelling  as  it 
was  brought  out  by  the  apostle.  The  nearest  approach 
that  the  epistle  reveals  to  this  order  of  Pauline  thinking 
is  contained  in  the  description  of  Christians  as  "par- 
takers of  Christ.2  In  its  own  way,  however,  it  empha- 
sizes the  saving  influence  which  emanates  from  the 
manifested  Son  of  God.  The  sacrifice  of  Christ,  accord- 
ing to  its  conception,  seals  the  new  covenant,^  and  thus 
is  calculated  to  inspire  to  a  quickening  confidence  in  the 
great  promises  connected  with  that  covenant.  As  a 
spiritual  sacrifice,  armed  with  a  spiritual  motive-power, 
it  is  adapted  to  free  the  conscience  from  the  burden  of 
mere  legal  works,  and  to  lead  into  a  true  service  of  God.* 
Furthermore  God  is  made  to  appear  specially  approach- 
able in  the  thought  that  at  His  right  hand  is  the  Media- 
tor who  came  through  temptation  and  suffering  to  a  full 
measure  of  sympathy.  The  disclosure  of  such  a  High 
Priest  demonstrates  that  there  is  a  throne  of  grace,  and 

1  Heb.  ii.  17.  '  ix.  15. 

2  iii.  14.  *  ix.  14. 


292  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

invites  men  in  spite  of  their  consciousness  of  unworthi- 
ness  to  draw  near  with  confidence.^  Indeed  contempla- 
tion of  His  person  and  work  is  in  such  a  sense  faith- 
inspiring,  that  He  may  fitly  be  named  the  author  and 
the  perfecter  of  our  faith.^ 

In  First  Peter  there  is  also  a  coupling  together  of  the 
objective  and  subjective  aspects  of  Christ's  work.  In 
accordance  with  the  practical  character  of  the  epistle  the 
superior  stress  falls  upon  the  latter.  The  sacrifice  of 
Christ  is,  in  fact,  in  every  mention  of  the  same,  brought 
into  association  with  some  spiritual  effect  that  ought  to 
follow  from  its  contemplation. ^  But  while  the  writer,  in 
his  homiletical  use  of  truth,  places  the  chief  stress  upon 
the  holy  persuasion  emanating  from  the  death  of  Christ, 
there  is  no  good  reason  to  suppose  that  he  ignored  the 
objective  aspect.  In  his  choice  of  words  he  pays  a 
probable  tribute  to  it  when  he  speaks  of  Christ  as  bear- 
ing our  sins  in  His  body  upon  the  tree,  or  when  he 
refers  to  Him  as  having  suffered  for  sins  once,  the 
righteous  for  the  unrighteous. 

An  essentially  Pauline  view  of  the  resurrection  of 
Christ,  as  an  important  factor  in  the  total  scheme  for 
rescuing  and  renewing  men,  appears  in  First  Peter.* 
The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  on  the  other  hand,  takes 
no  pains  to  specify  the  value  of  Christ's  resurrection  for 
Christian  faith,  and  contains  only  a  bare  reference  to 
the  fact.^  With  the  death  of  Christ  it  conjoins  immedi- 
ately His  ascension  or  entrance  into  the  heavenly  sanctu- 

1  Heb.  iv.  14-16,  X.  19,  22.  *  i  Pet.  i.  3. 

2  xii.  2.  ®  Heb.  xiii.  20. 
8  I  Pet.  i.  18-21,  ii.  24,  iii.  18,  iv.  i. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  293 

ary.  The  slight  attention  paid  to  the  great  intervening 
event  may  be  explained  very  largely  by  the  writer's  en- 
grossment in  the  description  of  the  high-priestly  doing 
of  Christ. 


VI. —  Christian  Life,  Individual  and  Collective. 

The  connection  which  is  made  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  between  the  remission  of  sins  and  the  work  of 
Christ  suggests  that  its  point  of  view  is  not  remote  from 
the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification.  This  term,  how- 
ever, is  wanting  to  its  vocabulary,  and  in  its  place  there 
is  a  recurring  reference  to  a  work  of  sanctification  or 
cleansing  {dyLa^etv,  KaOapit^eiv)}  A  formal  mention  of 
justification  is  also  wanting  in  First  Peter.  Both  epistles 
direct  attention  more  largely  to  the  progress  and  perfect- 
ing of  Christian  life  than  to  its  initial  stage.  A  special 
feature  of  First  Peter  is  its  stress  upon  divine  truth  as 
an  agent  of  renewal.^  A  distinguishing  characteristic  of 
Hebrews  is  the  prominence  which  it  gives  to  the  view 
that  Christian  life  is  a  practical  realization  of  a  covenant. 

1  Heb.  i.  3,  ii,  11,  ix.  13,  14,  x.  10,  14,  29,  xiii.  12.  Denney  contends 
that  under  his  contrasted  terminology  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  makes  a  very  close  approach  to  a  Pauline  meaning.  '*  The 
people,"  he  says,  "  were  sanctified,  not  when  they  were  raised  to  moral 
perfection,  but  when,  through  the  annuling  of  their  sin  by  sacrifice,  they 
had  been  constituted  into  a  people  of  God,  and  in  the  person  of  their 
representative  had  access  to  His  presence.  The  word  dyta^eiv,  in  short, 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  corresponds  as  nearly  as  possible  to  the 
Pauline  Si/catow;  the  sanctification  of  the  one  writer  is  the  justifica- 
tion of  the  other."  (The  Death  of  Christ,  its  Place  and  Interpretation 
in  the  New  Testament,  p.  221.) 

2  1  Pet.  i.  23-25. 


294  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

It  is  the  counterpart  of  the  better  covenant  inaugurated 
through  Christ,  the  fulfillment  of  the  ideal  which  the 
ancient  prophet  sketched  when  he  wrote  :  "  This  is  the 
covenant  that  I  will  make  with  the  house  of  Israel  after 
those  days,  saith  the  Lord  ;  I  will  put  my  laws  into  their 
mind,  and  on  their  heart  also  will  I  write  them."  ^  In 
accordance  with  the  perfection  of  the  new  covenant  its 
subjects  stand  in  the  light  of  great  promises,  but  are  also 
placed  under  very  grave  responsibilities.  Infidelity  to  a 
covenant  sealed  with  the  blood  of  Christ  is  a  sin  for  which 
pardon  can  hardly  be  anticipated.  Were  we  to  make  no 
allowance  for  the  rhetorical  fervor  of  the  writer's  dis- 
course, we  should  say  that  he  counted  such  a  sin  to 
be  wholly  unpardonable. ^  What  he  probably  meant  to 
assert,  however,  was  the  truth  that  the  apostasy  in 
question  was  so  grievous  as  scarcely  to  admit  of  remedy. 
A  magnifying  of  the  office  of  hope  is  characteristic  of 
both  Hebrews  and  First  Peter .^  Both  epistles  make 
use  of  the  term  in  connections  where  Paul  would  have 
been  disposed  to  speak  of  faith.  This  is  very  noticeable 
in  the  designation  of  hope  as  an  anchor  of  the  soul,  in 
the  characterization  of  it  as  the  medium  through  which 
we  draw  nigh  to  God,  and  in  the  description  of  piety  as  a 
hoping  in  God.  In  the  one  formal  definition  of  faith,  as 
contained  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  it  is  given  a 
sense  closely  allied  to  hope,  being  identified  with  the 
grasp  of  the  soul  on  a  future  and  promised  good.*  The 
ethical  potency  of  faith,  however,  as  a  source  of  present 

1  Heb.  viii.  6-13,  x.  16.  2  Heb.  vi.  4-8,  x.  26-31. 

8  Heb.  iii.  6,  vi.  11,  18,  19,  vii.  19,  x.  23  ;  i  Pet.  i.  3,  13,  21,  iii.  5,  15. 

*  Heb.  xi.  I. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  295 

obedience  and  righteous  achievement  is  not  overlooked. 
Naturally  the  relative  lack  of  emphasis  on  the  Pauline 
notion  of  mystical  union  with  Christ  has  an  effect  on  the 
representation  of  faith.  It  is  set  forth  in  the  epistle 
rather  as  a  principle  of  fidelity,  steadfastness,  and  coura- 
geous activity  than  as  a  means  of  inner  affiance  with  the 
Redeemer.^ 

The  virtue  which  is  most  commended  in  Hebrews 
might  be  defined  as  Christian  hardihood.  The  exhorta- 
tions of  this  eloquent  writing  breathe  a  martial  spirit, 
and  summon  Uke  the  notes  of  a  trumpet  to  a  resolute 
conflict  against  all  the  opposing  forces  which  rise  up 
between  one  and  the  great  recompense  of  reward.  In 
First  Peter  along  with  manful  endurance  the  gentler 
virtues  are  emphasized  —  tenderness  of  heart,  humble- 
ness of  mind,  and  the  love  that  covers  a  multitude  of 
sins.  In  the  standard  of  civic  and  domestic  virtue  which 
it  sets  forth  this  epistle  bears  a  close  resemblance  to  the 
writings  of  Paul.^ 

On  the  subject  of  church  constitution  the  two  epistles 
do  not  afford  precise  data.  Hebrews  contains  no  more 
explicit  reference  to  ecclesiastical  officials  than  is  found 
in  an  exhortation  to  those  addressed  to  remember  and 
to  obey  those  having  the  rule  over  them.^  First  Peter 
refers  to  elders  as  being  charged  with  oversight  of  the 
flock,  and  as  under  obligation  to  fulfill  the  charge  rather 
through  the  persuasion  of  a  good  example  than  through 
assumption  of  lordship.*     In  neither  epistle  is  there  any 

1  Heb.  iii.  12-19,  iv.  1-3,  x.  39,  xi.  3  Heb.  xiii.  7,  17,  24. 

2  I  Pet.  ii.  13-18,  iii.  1-7.  *  i  Pet.  v.  1-3. 


296  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

indication  of  the  sacerdotal  theory  which  makes  the 
Christian  body  at  large  dependent  on  the  mediation  of  a 
priestly  rank.  Hebrews  contemplates  no  possessor  of 
priestly  functions  under  the  new  covenant  apart  from 
Christ.  It  also  emphasizes  the  privilege  of  believers 
generally  to  enter  into  the  holy  place,  a  form  of  expres- 
sion which  denotes  that  one  man,  in  the  exercise  of  faith 
and  submission,  has  as  good  a  right  of  direct  approach 
unto  God  as  any  other.^  The  same  thought  appears  in 
the  Petrine  epistle  in  the  designation  of  Christians 
generally  as  a  holy  priesthood.^ 

Neither  epistle  contains  any  reference  to  the  eucharist. 
Neither  countenances  the  notion  that  Christianity  pro- 
vides for  any  proper  sacrificial  rite.  The  sacrifice  of 
Christ  is  the  one  offering  acknowledged  by  Hebrews,^ 
and  First  Peter  mentions  besides  only  those  spiritual 
sacrifices  which  all  Christians  offer  when  they  lift  up 
their  hearts  in  faith  and  devotion.*  The  former  epistle 
has  no  explicit  teaching  on  the  efficacy  of  baptism.  It 
mentions  the  term  only  in  a  single  instance,  and  then  in 
a  way  which  admits  of  including  under  it  more  than  the 
Christian  rite  proper,  since  the  plural  form  is  used.^ 
The  words  relative  to  bodily  washing  in  x.  22  may  in- 
close a  second  reference.  If  that  be  their  import,  they 
serve  as  a  token  that  the  writer  regarded  baptism,  after 
the  pattern  of  the  Levitical  rites,  as  a  means  of  cere- 
monial cleansing.  In  First  Peter  an  association  is  made 
between  baptism  and  being  saved,  but  the  context  takes 

1  Heb.  X.  19-22.  *  I  Pet.  ii.  5. 

2  I  Pet.  ii.  5.  5  Heb.  vi.  2. 

3  Heb.  ix.  27,  28,  X.  10,  12. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  297 

pains  to  indicate  that  it  is  not  the  mere  rite  that  is  thus 
efficacious,  but  the  rite  in  connection  with  a  religious 
attitude.  This  is  described  somewhat  enigmatically  as 
"  the  interrogation  of  a  good  conscience  toward  God."  ^ 
Probably  the  word  conscience  (crvvuhriaecos:)  is  here  to 
be  construed  as  an  objective  genitive,  and  the  phrase  is 
to  be  regarded  as  indicative  of  an  attitude  of  request  for 
a  conscience  cleansed  from  guilt  and  sin. 


VII. ESCHATOLOGY. 

The  trend  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  emphati- 
cally eschatological.  The  better  and  the  abiding  posses- 
sion, the  city  which  hath  foundations,  and  the  kingdom 
which  cannot  be  shaken  are  represented  to  be  above  and 
beyond  the  present  life,  and  are  pictured  as  the  proper 
objects  of  hope  and  aspiration.^  In  this  sense  an  escha- 
tological tone  dominates  the  epistle.  At  the  same  time 
it  gives  very  few  details  of  eschatology.  There  is  in  it 
an  intimation  in  line  with  the  early  apostolic  expectation 
of  the  speedy  close  of  the  dispensation.^  The  doctrine 
of  an  eternal  judgment,  or  one  perpetually  fixing  destiny, 
is  reckoned  among  elementary  teachings.*  So  also  is 
the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  From  the 
reference  to  the  worthies,  who  did  not  accept  deliver- 
ance that  **they  might  obtain  a  better  resurrection,"^ 
some  have  argued  that  the  author  thought  of  participa- 
tion in  the  resurrection  as  something  to  be  won,  and 

1  I  Pet.  iii.  21.  *  Heb.  vi.  2. 

2  Heb.  X.  34,  xi.  10,  xii.  28.  ^  Heb.  xi.  35. 
8  Heb.  X.  25. 


298  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

consequently  did  not  impute  it  to  the  wicked.^  The 
ground  for  the  conclusion,  however,  is  not  very  decisive. 
A  resurrection  to  honor  and  blessedness  might  be 
counted  a  prize  to  be  won,  as  opposed  to  a  resurrection 
simply  to  judgment. 

The  First  Epistle  of  Peter  agrees  with  Hebrews  in 
its  stress  upon  the  incorruptible  inheritance  held  in 
reserve.^  It  also  intimates  the  nearness  of  the  end  of 
the  dispensation.^  Peculiar  to  the  epistle  is  the  state- 
ment which  it  makes  respecting  the  proclamation  of  the 
gospel  message  in  the  region  of  the  dead.*  A  proper 
parallel  is  not  to  be  found  in  any  other  New  Testament 
writing.  A  reference  to  the  descent  of  Christ  into  Hades 
may  perhaps,  as  Meyer  contends,  be  contained  in  Eph. 
iv.  9.  But  it  is  only  in  First  Peter  that  there  is  any 
reference  to  the  preaching  of  Christ  to  the  dead.  Not 
all  interpreters,  it  is  true,  discover  that  much  here. 
The  natural  sense,  however,  of  the  singular  Petrine  sen- 
tences is  that  which  the  early  Church  imputed  to  them. 
The  collocation  of  the  clauses  in  chapter  iii  points  dis- 
tinctly to  the  preaching  of  the  crucified  Christ  and  to 
His  preaching  among  the  dead.  He  was  put  to  death 
in  the  flesh.  He  was  quickened  in  the  spirit.  In  the 
spirit,  that  is.  His  pneumatic  nature,  still  living  and 
active,  He  went  and  preached.  He  preached  not  to 
men  in  the  flesh  but  to  spirits,  disembodied  souls  in 
Hades.  He  preached,  not  to  those  still  in  the  course 
of  their  sins  upon  earth,  but  to  those  who  had  trans- 
gressed aforetime.     Moreover,  according  to  the  intima- 

1  So  Weiss  and  Beyschlag.  ^  i  Pet.  iv.  7. 

2  I  Pet.  i.  4.  *  I  Pet.  iii.  18-20. 


MODIFIED  PAULINISM  299 

tion  of  iv.  6,  He  preached  to  them  not  an  Old  Testament 
message,  but  the  message  introduced  by  His  own  minis- 
try upon  earth,  the  gospel  message.  Thus,  there  are 
too  many  items,  coherent  and  pointing  in  one  direction, 
to  admit  of  any  other  conclusion  than  that  the  writer 
meant  to  teach  that  Christ  preached  to  men  in  the 
region  of  the  dead.  As  the  description  of  this  trans- 
action falls  between  a  reference  to  the  death  of  Christ 
and  the  mention  of  His  resurrection,  it  seems  probable 
that  the  mission  to  the  dead  was  located  by  the  writer 
between  the  crucifixion  and  the  resurrection. 


CHAPTER  VI 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY 
I.  —  The  Question  of  Authorship. 

The  fourth  Gospel  and  the  first  of  the  Epistles  bear- 
ing the  name  of  John  are  so  largely  akin  in  style  and 
contents  that  the  reasonable  and  commonly  admitted 
conclusion  is  that  they  must  have  had  the  same  author. 
Some  points  of  contrast  between  them  may  doubtless  be 
specified.  The  Epistle  is  without  reference  to  Old 
Testament  types  and  precedents,  and  inculcates  more 
distinctly  than  the  Gospel  the  idea  of  propitiation.  It 
contains  also  some  peculiarities  in  the  choice  of  words 
and  phrases.^  But  these  points  of  difference  are  much 
more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  full  list  of  resem- 
blances. In  both  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistle  the  same 
habit  of  developing  a  proposition  by  repeating  it  in 
slightly  varied  form  is  observable.  In  both  there  are  the 
same  fundamental  representations  on  the  coming  of  the 
Son  of  God  in  the  flesh,  on  the  exhibition  of  the  love  of 
God  in  the  sending  of  the  Son,  on  the  Son  being  the 
source  of  life,  on  the  obligation  of  brotherly  love,  on 

1  For  instance  we  have  in  the  Epistle  irapovdia,    dvofxia,   c^etv  tov 
iraripa,  ^x^iv  tov  vlov,  ttoicTv  Tr)v  BiKaLOcrvvTjVf  apvucrOai  tov  vlov, 
300 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  301 

walking  in  the  light,  and  on  being  born  of  God.  In  both 
also  there  is  manifested  the  same  predilection  for  sharp 
antitheses,  for  the  coupling  together  of  such  opposites 
as  life  and  death,  light  and  darkness,  love  and  hatred, 
truth  and  falsehood,  the  Father  and  the  world,  God  and 
the  devil,  sonship  toward  God  and  sonship  toward  the 
devil.  In  short  the  reasons  are  compelling  for  a  close 
association  of  the  first  Epistle  with  the  fourth  Gospel. 

Early  Christian  thought,  if  not  with  entire  unanimity, 
yet  with  moderate  exception  before  the  last  half  of  the 
third  century,  assigned  the  Apocalypse  to  the  same 
author  who  wrote  the  fourth  Gospel  and  the  Epistle. 
The  modern  judgment,  too,  has  not  gone  entirely  coun- 
ter to  this  assignment.  The  Apocalypse,  however,  as 
has  been  noticed,  differs  so  far  from  the  other  two  writ- 
ings, that  it  is  appropriate  to  treat  of  it  in  connection 
with  a  different  theological  type.  The  writings  accord- 
ingly which  represent  the  specific  theological  type  de- 
nominated the  Johannine  are  the  fourth  Gospel  and  the 
first  Epistle.  The  style  and  contents  of  the  second  and 
third  Epistles  afford  indeed  no  real  motive  to  separate 
them  from  the  proper  Johannine  group  ;  but  they  con- 
tain so  little  theological  matter  that  there  is  very  slight 
occasion  to  bring  them  into  consideration. 

The  author  of  the  Gospel  and  the  Epistle  withholds 
his  name.  He  furnishes  nevertheless  quite  distinct  inti- 
mations of  his  identity,  or  at  least  of  the  judgment  which 
he  would  have  his  readers  form  respecting  his  identity. 
In  the  first  place,  he  gives  himself  out  as  an  eyewitness 
of  the  events  narrated.  Leaving  aside  the  question 
whether  xxi.  24  is  to  be  reckoned  as  belonging  to  an  ap- 


302  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

pendix  from  a  later  hand,  we  have  in  xix.  35  this  une- 
quivocal testimony :  "  He  that  hath  seen  hath  borne 
witness,  and  his  witness  is  true :  and  he  knoweth  that 
he  saith  true  that  ye  also  may  believe."  The  use  here 
by  the  writer  of  the  third  person  is  most  naturally  con- 
strued, not  as  a  reference  to  an  outside  party,  but  as  a 
literary  device  for  naming  himself.^  The  declaration, 
"  He  knoweth  that  he  saith  true,"  presents  the  witness 
as  still  present  over  against  the  recorded  testimony  on 
the  one  hand  and  the  contemplated  readers  on  the  other. 
In  line  with  this  interpretation  stands  i.  14  in  the  Gospel 
and  i.  1-4  in  the  Epistle.  Only  one  who  had  been  an 
eyewitness,  or  meant  to  figure  as  such,  would  naturally 
have  used  the  language  of  either  passage.  In  the  sec- 
ond place,  while  the  author  goes  beyond  the  example  of 
any  other  evangelist  in  the  number  of  instances  in  which 
he  mentions  the  names  of  individual  disciples,  he  prac- 
tices a  continuous  reserve  respecting  the  name  of  a  dis- 
ciple who  evidently  must  have  held  a  conspicuous  place 
in  the  apostolic  group.  Jesus  upon  the  cross  commends 
His  mother  to  this  disciple.  The  same  disciple  leaned 
upon  the  breast  of  Jesus  at  the  last  supper  and  asked  of 
Him  a  question  in  response  to  Peter's  beckoning.  The 
same  in  all  probability  was  one  of  the  two  unnamed  dis- 
ciples of  the  Baptist  who  were  among  the  first  to  follow 
Jesus.  Why  this  withholding  of  the  name  of  one  disci- 
ple in  the  Gospel  which  shows  most  freedom  in  the 
mention  of  names.?     The  only  plausible  answer  is  that 

1  In  ix.  37  Christ  is  represented  as  referring  to  Himself  by  the  same 
third  personal  pronoun  (cKetvos),  and  Paul  in  2  Cor.  xii.  3-5  uses 
6  ToiovTO<s  in  an  analogous  manner.  It  is  perfectly  credible,  therefore, 
that  the  writer  should  have  used  eKctvos  in  referring  to  himself. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  303 

the  writer  identified  himself,  or  wished  his  readers  to 
identify  him,  with  the  unnamed  disciple — a  disciple  be- 
longing apparently  to  the  inner  circle  of  the  twelve,  and 
therefore  presumably  John,  since  he  is  discriminated 
from  Peter,  and  no  one  in  face  of  the  early  martyrdom 
of  James  would  think  of  him  as  the  writer.  That  the 
narrator  should  prefer  to  indicate  himself  in  an  indirect 
way  is  intelligible;  that  he  should  have  any  motive  to 
designate  another  continuously  in  that  fashion  is  not  in- 
telligible. We  are  thus  held  by  distinct  peculiarities  of 
the  writings  to  the  conclusion  that  the  author  certainly 
meant  his  readers  to  understand  that  he  was  an  eyewit- 
ness, and  have  besides  a  probable  indication  that  this 
eyewitness  was  meant  to  be  identified  with  the  Apostle 
John,  the  son  of  Zebedee. 

It  may  properly  count  somewhat  in  favor  of  con- 
formity between  the  fact  of  authorship  and  the  clue  con- 
tained in  the  writings  that  early  tradition  assigned  them 
to  the  Apostle  John,  and  that  history  knows  of  no  rival 
candidate  to  put  in  his  place.  The  tradition  is  as  clear 
and  controlling  as  the  analogy  of  other  apostolic  writings 
would  lead  us  to  expect.  As  Meyer  says  of  the  fourth 
Gospel,  *'  The  continuity  of  the  attestations  to  it,  and 
their  growing  extent  in  connection  with  the  literature  of 
the  Church,  are  as  evident  as  we  ever  can  and  do  require 
for  the  external  confirmation  of  any  New  Testament 
writing."  ^  It  is  true  that  a  party  of  the  second  century, 
the  so-called  Alogi,  challenged  the  fact  of  Johannine 
authorship.  But  they  were  an  obscure  party,  had  a 
motive    for  their    challenge   in    their  antipathy  to   the 

1  Comm.  on  John,  p.  14. 


304  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Johannine  doctrine  of  the  Logos,  and  were  to  that 
degree  lacking  in  critical  competency,  that  they  ascribed 
the  fourth  Gospel  as  well  as  the  Apocalypse  to  Cerin- 
thus.  It  is  hardly  worth  while,  therefore,  to  bring  them 
onto  the  witness  stand.  Their  testimony  is  in  truth  a 
little  equivocal  for  the  negative  side.  As  Ezra  Abbot 
remarks,  '*  The  fact  that  they  ascribed  the  fourth  Gospel 
to  Cerinthus,  a  heretic  of  the  first  century,  contemporary 
with  the  Apostle  John,  shows  that  they  could  not  pre- 
tend that  this  Gospel  was  a  recent  work."  ^  No  respect- 
able critic  of  the  present  day  would  follow  the  Alogi  in 
putting  the  Judaizing  Gnostic  Cerinthus  in  place  of  the 
apostle. 

Aside  from  the  weak  and  self-refuted  challenge  by 
the  Alogi,  there  is  no  positive  item  in  the  line  of  exter- 
nal evidences  which  can  be  cited  against  the  traditional 
theory  of  Johannine  authorship.  It  has  been  supposed, 
it  is  true,  that  the  position  assumed  by  the  Quartodeci- 
mans  of  the  Asiatic  churches  in  the  Easter  controversy, 
near  the  end  of  the  second  century,  involves  an  adverse 
comment  on  that  theory.  But  the  supposition  is  not 
well  taken.  If  a  proper  distinction  is  made  between 
the  motive  which  originally  determined  the  celebration 
of  Easter  on  the  fourteenth  of  Nisan  and  the  arguments 
which  were  employed  by  individuals  two  or  three  genera- 
tions later  under  stress  of  controversy,  no  real  occasion 
will  be  found  in  this  whole  matter  for  denying  the  author- 
ship of  the  fourth  Gospel  to  the  Apostle  John.  Primarily, 
it  may  be  presumed,  the  general  thought  that  Jesus  was 
the  true    Paschal    Lamb,  by  whose   shed   blood   came 

^The  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel:  External  Evidences, p.  i8. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  305 

deliverance  to  mankind,  was  regarded  as  a  sujf!icient 
ground  for  memorializing  the  day  on  which  the  Passover 
feast  was  celebrated.  John  and  his  more  immediate 
followers  in  the  Asiatic  churches,  apart  from  all  question 
as  to  the  precise  day  on  which  the  last  supper,  or  the 
crucifixion,  had  place,  could  have  assented,  on  the  speci- 
fied ground  alone,  to  the  custom  of  celebrating  the 
proper  Passover  day,  the  fourteenth  of  Nisan.  Accord- 
ingly the  fact  that  some  of  the  Quartodecimans,  at  a 
later  date,  may  have  given  a  more  specific  ground  for 
electing  the  fourteenth  of  Nisan  —  namely,  the  occur- 
rence of  the  last  supper  on  that  day — a  ground  not  in 
full  harmony  with  the  Johannine  chronology  of  the  pas- 
sion, is  of  very  little  consequence.  By  no  means  does 
it  import  that  John  could  not  have  lived  and  labored  and 
written  within  the  domain  of  the  Asiatic  churches.  He 
could  have  done  all  that,  and  yet  not  have  been  consist- 
ently followed  by  every  controversialist  as  respects 
chronological  data  which  he  had  never  attempted  to 
turn  into  a  prominent  issue.  At  the  time  that  John's 
Gospel  came  into  circulation  the  Synoptical  Gospels 
were  an  acknowledged  authority,  and  Christians  in  the 
Asiatic  churches,  however  little  they  were  inclined  to 
challenge  the  former,  very  naturally  in  one  connection 
or  another  took  account  of  the  chronological  data  of  the 
latter.! 

Again,  it  has  been  supposed  that  evidence  destructive 
of  the  theory  of  Johannine  authorship  is  discoverable  in 

1  Compare  Drummond,  An  Inquiry  into  the  Character  and  Author- 
ship of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  pp.  441  513 ;  Stanton,  The  Gospels  as  His- 
torical Documents,  I.  173-197. 


306  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ancient  testimony  to  the  martyrdom  of  the  apostle  John. 
The  testimony  is  found  in  a  reputed  saying  of  Papias 
and  in  certain  forms  of  statement  in  the  church  calendar. 
Now,  for  the  former  no  sort  of  a  voucher  can  be  found 
within  at  least  three  centuries  from  the  close  of  the 
apostolic  age,  and  besides  it  is  given  in  too  confused  and 
bungling  a  fashion  to  command  any  confidence  as  against 
the  line  of  opposing  witnesses.  As  respects  the  church 
calendar,  it  is  very  questionable  whether  its  forms  of 
statement  primarily  had  any  reference  to  the  celebration 
of  the  martyrdom  of  John  or  any  design  of  specifying 
the  date  of  his  death.  So  J.  H.  Bernard  argues,  and 
Harnack  approves  his  contention.^ 

A  principal  negative  item  urged  against  the  Johannine 
authorship  is  the  silence  of  Polycarp  in  his  epistle  to  the 
Philippians  and  of  Ignatius  in  his  epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians.  This  silence  is  taken  as  evidence  that  John  could 
not  have  presided  over  the  Asiatic  churches  and  published 
a  Gospel  in  their  territory.  But  the  evidence  is  far  from 
decisive.  Polycarp,  in  addressing  a  society  with  which 
John  is  not  known  to  have  had  any  personal  relations, 
had  small  occasion  to  refer  to  the  apostle.  Ignatius 
might  appropriately  have  made  some  allusion  to  him  in 
writing  to  the  Ephesians.  It  is  to  be  noticed,  however, 
that  he  was  very  sparing  of  references  to  the  apostles. 
In  five  out  of  seven  of  his  epistles  he  gives  them  no 
specific  mention.  Even  in  writing  to  the  Romans  he 
introduces  not  a  single  counsel  on  the  authority  of 
Peter  and   Paul,  and  only  incidentally  mentions  their 

iThe  Irish  Quarterly,  Jan.,  1908;  Theologische  Literaturzeitung, 
Jan.  2,  1909, 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  307 

names.  Manifestly  the  silence  of  either  of  these  writers 
affords  no  weighty  ground  of  objection  for  one  who  does 
not  assert,  as  a  canon  of  criticism,  that  an  epistle  must 
necessarily  contain  every  item  that  is  pertinent  to  the  his- 
torical situation  existing  at  the  time  of  its  composition. 

Over  against  these  meagre  grounds  of  challenge,  on 
the  score  of  external  evidences,  we  may  cite  the  testi- 
mony of  men  able  to  claim  acquaintance  with  those  who 
could  scarcely  have  been  ignorant  of  the  real  facts  as  to 
the  Ephesian  residence  of  John  and  the  original  associa- 
tion of  his  name  with  the  fourth  Gospel.  Here  belong 
in  particular  Irenaeus  and  Polycrates.  Both  were  na- 
tives of  Asia  Minor,  and  the  latter  was  a  lifelong  resi- 
dent. Both  enjoyed  fellowship  with  distinguished  men 
of  an  earlier  generation.  Irenaeus  in  his  youth  had 
listened  to  Polycarp,  and  Polycrates  belonged  to  a  family 
which  had  furnished  many  bishops.  Both  indicate  their 
undoubting  conviction  that  the  Apostle  John  had  labored, 
as  the  tradition  reports  him  to  have  done,  in  the  western 
section  of  Asia  Minor ;  and  Irenaeus  besides  states  expli- 
citly that  John  wrote  the  fourth  Gospel.^  It  has  been 
alleged  indeed  that  Irenaeus  very  likely  misinterpreted 
the  words  of  Polycarp  which  he  heard  in  his  early  years, 
understanding  him  to  speak  of  the  Apostle  John  when 
perchance  he  spoke  of  some  other  John.  But  it  is  not 
at  all  probable  that  Irenaeus  depended  in  his  judgment 
of  John's  career  simply  upon  a  youthful  reminiscence. 
He  was  no  recluse  shut  out  from  the  world  of  his  time. 
He  was,  on  the  contrary,  a  man  of  affairs,  and  may  be 

iCont.  Haer.,  iii.  i.  i.  See  also  iii.  3.  4  and  the  epistles  to  Florinus 
and  Victor  as  cited  by  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.,  v.  20,  24. 


3o8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

presumed,  in  his  communication  with  his  elders,  such  as 
the  venerable  Pothinus,  to  have  found  means  of  confirm- 
ing or  correcting  the  impressions  derived  from  the  ex- 
periences of  his  youth.  As  for  Polycrates,  a  man  who 
spent  his  life  on  the  site  of  the  reputed  activity  of  the 
Apostle  John,  it  is  quite  incredible  that  he  should  not 
have  represented  a  long-standing  and  thoroughly  domi- 
nant tradition.  Polycrates,  it  is  true,  in  the  scanty  ex- 
tracts from  his  writings  which  are  extant,  does  not 
directly  pronounce  on  the  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gos- 
pel ;  but  indirectly  he  does  refer  that  Gospel  to  the 
Apostle  John,  inasmuch  as  he  identifies  the  John  whom 
he  mentions  with  the  beloved  disciple  who  is  set  forth 
in  the  Gospel  itself  as  the  responsible  witness  for  the 
facts  recorded.^ 

Supplementing  the  testimony  of  these  eminent  wit- 
nesses we  have  traces  of  the  influence  of  the  fourth  Gos- 
pel upon  Christian  literature  from  an  early  point  in  the 
second  century.  While  these  traces  are  not  a  complete 
proof  of  Johannine  authorship,  they  are  favorable  to  the 
theory  of  such  authorship  as  making  credible  the  exist- 
ence of  the  Gospel  at  the  date  to  which  tradition  assigns 
John's  death.  In  the  epistles  of  Ignatius  there  are  very 
distinct  reminders  of  Johannine  thought  and  phraseology ,2 
and  the  epistle  of  Polycarp  is  not  wholly  destitute  of  such 
reminders.  There  is  fair  ground  for  concluding  that  the 
Gnostic  Basilides,  who  was  conspicuous  in  the  reign  of 
Hadrian  (a.  d.  i  17-138),  used  the  fourth  Gospel  as  one 
of  a  collection  of  Gospels.     A  growing  tendency  has 

lEusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.,  v.  24. 

2  Philadelphians,  vii,  ix ;  Magnesians,  vii,  x ;  Romans,  vii. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  309 

been  manifested  by  recent  criticism  to  admit  the  cer- 
tainty that  Justin  Martyr  made  use  of  the  fourth  Gospel 
and  it  is  perfectly  clear  from  Tatian's  employment  of  it 
in  his  Diatessaron,  that  it  had  in  his  day  a  recognized 
standing  among  the  biographies  of  Jesus.^ 

It  was  stated  above  that  history  knows  of  no  rival 
candidate,  in  relation  to  the  composition  of  the  fourth 
Gospel,  who  can  legitimately  be  put  in  the  place  of  the 
Apostle  John.  A  rival  has  indeed  been  brought  forward 
in  the  person  of  a  certain  Presbyter  John ;  but  the  cre- 
dentials which  are  presented  in  his  behalf  are  of  the 
most  ghostly  description.  Early  tradition  offers  no  plea 
for  the  presbyter.  When  Gains,  at  the  end  of  the  second 
century,  wanted  to  strip  the  Apocalypse  of  apostolic 
sanction,  he  shelved  off  the  production  onto  Cerinthus. 
There  was  apparently  no  Presbyter  John  in  sight  at  that 
time  to  whom  responsibility  might  plausibly  be  charged.^ 
No  real  authority  vouches  for  the  fact  that  this  presbyter 
ever  wrote  a  line.  No  trustworthy  testimony  assures  us 
that  he  was  seen  in  Ephesus  or  its  neighborhood.  The 
conjecture  of  Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  more  than  a  cen- 
tury and  a  half  after  the  Johannine  era,  that  the  presby- 
ter may  have  been  commemorated  by  one  of  two  monu- 
ments in  Ephesus,  is  a  long  way  off  from  the  domain  of 
history.  The  whole  sum  of  evidence  which  we  possess 
for  the  bare  existence  of  the  John  in  question  is  a  single 
line  from  Papias  as  cited  by  Eusebius.^  The  passage  in 
which    the  line  is    found  runs  as  follows :  "  I  will  not 

1  See,  on  the  evidence  contained  in  the  writings  of  this  entire  list  of 
authors,  Drummond,  Fourth  Gospel ;  Stanton,  The  Gospels. 

2  Compare  Zahn,  Einleitung,  II.  449.  ^  Hist.  Eccl.,  ill.  39. 


310  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

hesitate  to  put  down  for  thee  along  with  the  interpreta- 
tions as  many  things  also  as  I  once  learned  well  from 
the  elders,  and  remembered  well,  strongly  confirming  the 
truth  about  them.  For  I  used  not  to  take  pleasure  in 
those  who  say  a  great  deal,  as  most  men  do,  but  in  those 
who  teach  the  truth ;  and  not  in  those  who  mention  for- 
eign commandments,  but  in  those  [who  mention]  the 
[commandments]  given  from  the  Lord  to  the  faith,  and 
coming  from  the  truth  itself.  And  also  if  anyone  came 
on  any  occasion  who  had  been  a  follower  of  the  elders, 
I  used  to  inquire  into  the  discourses  of  the  elders,  what 
Andrew  or  what  Peter  said,  or  what  Philip,  or  what 
Thomas,  or  what  John  or  Matthew,  or  any  other  of  the 
disciples  of  the  Lord  [said],  and  what  Aristion  and  the 
Presbyter  [or  Elder]  John,  disciples  of  the  Lord,  say." 
Now,  it  has  not  always  been  judged  that  the  John  who  is 
numbered  among  elders  and  disciples  in  the  second  in- 
stance is  different  from  the  John  who  is  numbered 
among  elders  and  disciples  in  the  former  instance.  But 
suppose  we  grant,  with  the  majority  of  recent  critics, 
that  it  was  the  intention  of  Papias  to  distinguish  between 
the  two,  what  historical  conclusion  have  we  established  ? 
Simply  this,  that  there  was  among  the  early  Christians 
a  man  by  the  name  of  John,  who  in  the  thought  of 
Papias  was  associated  with  Aristion.  The  warrant  for 
connecting  this  John  with  any  extant  writing  is  totally 
wanting.  To  put  him  in  the  place  which  the  tradition 
assigns  to  the  son  of  Zebedee  is  anything  but  a  historical 
procedure. 

But  could  the  Apostle  John  have  written  a  book  of 
such  extraordinary  character  as  the  fourth  Gospel  or  the 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY        31 1 

related  Epistle  ?  To  this  question  it  may  be  replied  that 
we  have  no  such  precise  measure  of  the  mental  abilities 
and  peculiarities  of  the  apostle  as  to  be  qualified  to 
assert  a  negative.  It  is  alleged,  indeed,  that  it  is  incon- 
ceivable that  a  Galilean  fisherman  should  have  been 
competent  to  write  treatises  so  tinged  with  mystic  ideal- 
ism. But  we  have  nothing  to  do  here  with  what  a  Gali- 
lean fisherman  could  or  could  not  accomplish.  John  has 
left  no  daily  report  of  his  intellectual  life  which  assures 
us  that  he  remained  in  a  perfectly  static  condition  from 
the  year  30  to  the  year  90.  More  than  one  person  has 
taken  rank  among  scholars  who  had  scarcely  reached 
the  alphabet  at  the  stage  of  early  manhood.  Endowed 
with  a  good  original  soil  John's  soul  might,  for  aught  we 
know,  being  enriched  during  a  period  of  fifty  or  sixty 
years  by  reflection,  reading,  and  experience,  have  pro- 
duced writings  of  the  type  of  the  Gospel  and  Epistle 
associated  with  his  name. 

A  grain  more  of  consideration  may  be  awarded  to  a 
second  allegation,  namely,  that  it  is  next  to  inconceivable 
that  a  man  who  lived  familiarly  with  one  bearing  like 
Christ  the  common  human  form  should  have  entertained 
and  expressed  such  a  transcendent  view  of  His  personal- 
ity. The  worshipful  attitude  toward  the  Master  who 
had  also  been  the  earthly  companion  is  indeed  remark- 
able. But  who  shall  say  that  it  was  impossible  for  a 
disciple  whose  deeply  enthusiastic  soul  had  been  taken 
captive }  The  example  of  Paul  refutes  the  alleged  im- 
possibility. It  may  be  said,  indeed,  that  Paul  did  not 
company  with  Christ,  and  besides  got  His  impression  of 
Him  through  the  medium  of  a  heavenly  vision.     But 


312  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Paul  in  fact  was  not  remote  from  realistic  ground.  He 
trod  the  site  of  Christ's  ministry  while  yet  the  recollec- 
tion of  it  was  fresh  in  the  minds  of  multitudes.  He 
was  in  close  contact  with  those  who  criticised  and  con- 
demned His  Lord  as  well  as  with  those  who  loved  and 
honored  Him.  While  his  thought  of  the  essential  glory 
of  Christ  may  have  been  helped  by  the  disclosure  before 
the  gates  of  Damascus,  it  is  not  certain  that  the  vision 
made  known  a  brighter  form  than  that  which  was  appre- 
hended by  the  ardent  faith  and  imagination  of  the  dis- 
ciple who  had  been  present  at  the  transfiguration  scene, 
and  who  confidently  expected  that  Christ  would  be  re- 
vealed at  no  distant  day  in  exceeding  glory.  Further- 
more, there  is  a  shade  of  presumption  in  assuming  that 
the  actual  personality  of  Christ  was  not  such  that  an 
appreciative  companion  might  derive  from  close  com- 
munion with  Him  a  basis  for  a  most  exalted  view  of  His 
moral  beauty  and  unique  connection  with  the  divine. 
On  the  whole,  there  is  no  more  warrant  for  concluding 
that  the  transcendent  view  in  the  fourth  Gospel  was  im- 
possible for  John  than  there  is  for  affirming  that  a  con- 
verted Pharisee  could  never  have  come  within  a  few 
years  of  Christ's  death  to  entertain  and  promulgate  the 
transcendent  view  contained  in  the  Pauline  epistles. 

The  principal  difficulty  in  the  way  of  assuming  the 
Johannine  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel  is  the  broad 
contrast  between  it  and  the  Synoptical  Gospels.  This 
contrast  is  not  indeed  in  its  whole  extent  a  ground  for 
rational  doubt.  On  the  contrary,  some  points  of  devia- 
tion are  much  better  explained  on  the  supposition  of 
Johannine  authorship  than  on  the  opposite  supposition. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  313 

Why  should  a  writer  who  was  conscious  of  reporting  at 
second  hand  depart  from  the  hnes  of  a  history  already 
put  in  circulation  ?  Would  he  not  have  reason  to  appre- 
hend that  his  departures  from  the  earlier  record  would 
discredit  his  own  composition  ?  On  the  other  hand,  one 
who  was  conscious  that  in  his  possession  of  facts  he  was 
the  peer  of  any  possible  narrator  might,  out  of  the  ful- 
ness of  his  confidence,  be  somewhat  indifferent  to  the 
exact  correspondence  of  his  narrative  to  the  reports  of 
certain  other  writers.  This  point  of  view  may  be  applied 
to  various  portions  of  the  subject-matter  of  the  fourth 
Gospel,  such  as  its  account  of  a  plurality  of  visits  on  the 
part  of  Christ  to  Judaea,  and  its  apparent  location  of  the 
last  supper  on  the  evening  preceding  the  proper  com- 
mencement of  the  passover  feast.  For  aught  that  any- 
body knows  there  was  a  fair  occasion  to  supplement  the 
Galilean  document,  on  which  the  Synoptical  Gospels 
may  be  supposed  to  have  been  based,  and  to  revise  one 
or  another  of  their  statements.  Indeed  it  is  the  opinion 
of  eminent  exegetes  that  the  Synoptical  Gospels  them- 
selves point  to  the  fact  of  an  early  Judaean  ministry  of 
which  they  give  no  description.^  In  any  case  deviations 
of  this  kind  from  the  earlier  sketches  of  Christ's  life 
would  make  quite  as  much  of  an  enigma  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  the  author  needed  to  borrow  his  facts,  as  they 
do  on  the  supposition  that  he  wrote  with  the  assurance 
of  one  who  felt  that  he  himself  had  all  the  requisites  of 
a  competent  witness. 

1  See  Matt.  iv.  12;  Mark,  i.  14.  Tokens  of  visits  to  Judaea  not 
described  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels  have  also  been  recognized  by  some 
in  the  following  texts  :  Matt.  xvi.  i,  xxiii.  37-39,  xxvii.  57  ;  Mark  iii.  22, 
vii.  I,  xi.  2,  3,  xiv.  14,  xv.  43;  Luke  x.  25-37,  38-42,  xiii.  34,  35. 


314  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

But  though  some  of  the  contrasts  with  the  Synoptical 
narratives  constitute  no  real  ground  of  objection,  it  must 
be  conceded  that  the  peculiar  tone  of  Christ's  discourses 
in  the  fourth  Gospel  and  the  freedom  with  which  He  is 
represented  to  have  put  forth  His  high  claims  even  at 
the  opening  of  His  ministry  constitute  a  real  difficulty. 
From  the  other  evangelists  we  should  gather  that  Christ's 
speech  was  more  terse  and  aphoristic,  and  less  subtle 
and  mystical,  than  it  appears  in  the  report  of  the  fourth 
evangelist.  We  should  also  conclude  that  in  the  earlier 
stages  of  His  ministry  He  practised  more  reserve  on  the 
subject  of  His  personal  and  official  rank  than  appears  in 
the  latest  biography. 

In  response  to  these  sources  of  objection  it  may  be 
said,  that  the  strong  individuality  of  John  naturally  made 
its  impression  upon  his  sketch  of  the  life  of  Christ ;  that 
the  distance  of  the  time  of  writing  from  the  events 
narrated  dulled  the  edge  of  verbal  recollection  and  facil- 
itated the  reproduction  of  Christ's  discourses  in  a  Johan- 
nine  dialect ;  that  it  was  appropriate  in  the  concluding 
biography  of  Christ  to  give  relatively  a  large  amount  of 
attention  to  matters  supplementary  to  those  reported  in 
the  biographies  already  current,  among  which  matters 
were  included  some  of  the  more  private  and  confidential 
addresses  of  the  Master  to  His  special  disciples ;  and 
that  the  appearance  of  certain  aberrant  tendencies  in 
christological  thinking  dictated  that  an  earnest  effort 
should  be  made  to  set  forth  what  was  deemed  the  true 
exposition  of  Christ's  person.  These  considerations  may 
not  fully  overcome  the  difficulties  in  question.  In  fact 
it  must  be  granted  that  an  enigmatic  element  remains  at 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  315 

the  end  of  all  attempts  to  explain  this  Gospel.  The 
best  that  can  be  done  is  to  reduce  this  element  by  mak- 
ing large  account  of  the  idiosyncracies  of  the  author. 
He  must  be  rated  as  an  ideahst,  a  mystic,  so  given  to 
viewing  things  according  to  their  absolute  type  as  to  be 
habitually  occupied  with  that  type,  to  a  relative  neglect 
of  primary  and  intermediate  forms  and  stages.  There 
may  be  some  difficulty  in  ascribing  this  peculiar  bent  to 
the  Apostle  John.  Still,  as  has  been  suggested,  our 
knowledge  of  the  apostle  affords  no  compelling  ground 
for  assuming  that  the  marked  peculiarity  could  not  have 
been  characteristic  of  him.  It  is  to  be  remembered, 
furthermore,  that  difficulty  is  not  escaped  by  placing  a 
negative  on  the  Johannine  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gos- 
pel. If  this  writing  is  to  be  referred  to  any  eyewitness, 
it  might  as  well  be  assigned  to  the  Apostle  John  as  to 
any  other.  The  writing,  as  has  been  shown,  does  make 
claim  to  have  issued  from  an  eyewitness.  Now  a  denial 
of  the  legitimacy  of  this  claim  cannot  be  entered  with- 
out bringing  in  very  considerable  enigmas.  In  the  first 
place  it  will  need  to  be  asked  in  the  face  of  such  denial, 
How  is  the  lofty  spiritual  level  of  this  Gospel  consonant 
with  the  supposition  that  it  issued  from  the  mind  of  a 
counterfeiter  ?  There  are  manifold  sentences  in  it  which 
age  after  age  speak  like  a  divine  music  to  the  hearts  of 
men.  How  came  it  about  that  an  insincere  mind  should 
have  been  the  fount  whence  issued  these  heavenly  say- 
ings ?  Again,  it  will  need  to  be  asked.  How  explain 
the  measure  of  circumstantial  details  which  distinguishes 
this  Gospel  ?  Minute  specifications  on  persons,  times, 
and  places  were  not  necessary  to  one  who  had  no  other 


3l6  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

reason  for  appealing  to  history  than  his  desire  to  get 
a  framework  upon  which  he  might  hang  his  theological 
ideas.  Neither  could  he  indulge  in  them,  unless  person- 
ally conversant  with  the  subjects  touched  upon,  without 
naturally  incurring  more  occasion  for  correction  than  has 
been  proved  against  the  author  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 
"  Whether  we  turn,"  says  Lightfoot,  *no  the  Messianic 
hopes  of  the  chosen  people,  with  all  the  attendant  cir- 
cumstances with  which  imagination  had  invested  this 
expected  event,  or  to  the  mutual  relations  of  Samaritans, 
Jews,  Galilaeans,  Romans,  and  the  respective  feelings, 
prejudices,  beliefs,  customs  of  each,  or  to  the  topography 
as  well  of  the  city  and  the  temple  as  of  the  rural  dis- 
tricts —  the  Lake  of  Gennesaret,  and  the  cornfields  and 
mountain  ridges  of  Shechem  —  or  to  the  contemporary 
history  of  the  Jewish  hierarchy  and  the  Herodian 
sovereignty,  we  are  alike  struck  at  every  turn  with 
subtle  and  unsuspicious  traces,  betokening  the  familiarity 
with  which  the  writer  moves  amidst  the  ever-shifting 
scenes  of  this  wonderful  narrative,"  ^  Make  this  record 
of  circumstantial  items  the  offspring  of  the  well-stored 
memory  of  an  eyewitness,  and  we  have  an  explanation 
both  of  their  multiplicity  and  of  their  ability  in  general 
to  endure  such  tests  of  accuracy  as  are  available.  Refer 
them  to  the  invention  of  one  who  neither  knew  nor 
cared  for  the  facts  of  real  history  and  they  are  placed 
beyond  the  range  of  probable  explanation  both  as  to 
quantity  and  quality.  ^     We  conclude  then,  notwithstand- 

1  Essays  on  the   Johannine  Authorship  of    the    fourth  Gospel,  by 
Abbot,  Peabody,  and  Lightfoot,  p.  150. 

2  For  specifications  on  persons  see  i.  35-51,  ii.  13-20,  iii.   i,  vi.  5,  8, 
68,  vii.  3,  5,  xi.  1,16,  49,  xii.  2-4,  xiii.  6,  23,  26,  36,  xiv.  5,  8,  22,  xviii.  10- 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  317 

ing  the  extraordinary  character  of  the  fourth  Gospel, 
that  we  choose  the  path  of  least  difficulty  when  we 
attribute  it,  as  well  as  the  closely  related  epistle,  to 
the  Apostle  John. 

The  above  discussion  proceeds  on  the  assumption  that 
the  choice  lies  between  assigning  the  fourth  Gospel  as  a 
whole  to  the  Apostle  John  and  excluding  him  from  all 
direct  participation  in  its  composition.  Theoretically  a 
third  alternative  is  admissible.  As  the  Apostle  Matthew 
is  supposed  to  have  written  out  discourses  of  Jesus  which 
were  incorporated  with  the  first  Gospel,  so  John  may  be 
regarded  as  having  contributed  a  collection  of  discourses 
which  by  a  later  hand  was  combined  with  narratives  of 
the  life  of  Jesus.  A  theory  of  this  kind  is  not  unknown 
to  New  Testament  criticism. ^     Evidently  it  is  fitted  to 

15,  18,  xix.  25, 38,  39,  XX.  24,  xxi ;  on  places,  i.  28,  44,  46,  ii.  i,  iii.  23,  iv. 
5,  V.  2,  vi.  19,  viii.  20,  ix,  7,  x.  23,  40,  xi.  18,  54,  xviii.  i,  xix.  13,  17,  xx. 
18,  xxi.  2  ;  on  times,  i.  29,  35,  39,  43,  ii.  i,  13,  20,  23,  iv.  6,  40,  52,  v.  35, 
vi.  4,  vii.  2,  X.  22,  xi.  6,  39,  xii.  i,  xix.  14.  Over  against  so  much  evi- 
dence of  acquaintanceship  with  Judaea  there  is  no  sort  of  probability 
that  the  writer,  in  saying  that  Caiaphas  was  high  priest  that  year,  meant 
to  intimate  that  the  office  of  high  priest  was  a  yearly  one.  The  ex- 
pression does  not  necessarily  have  such  an  import.  To  one  who  esteemed 
the  year  of  Christ's  death  the  year  of  all  years  it  was  not  unnatural  to 
term  it  that  year  in  writing  to  those  distant  in  time  and  place  from  the 
scene  of  the  crucifixion.  Doubtless  some  indications  of  a  relative  lack 
of  discrimination  maybe  pointed  out  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  As  will  be 
noticed  presently,  there  is  apparent  somewhat  less  of  care  than  is  ob- 
servable in  the  Synoptical  Gospels  to  indicate  definitely  the  components 
of  the  Jewish  community.  Specific  references  to  the  scribes  or  lawyers 
are  wanting,  and  the  broad  national  term,  the  Jews,  is  used  where  some 
portion  of  the  people  might  have  been  named.  This  characteristic, 
however,  is  measurably  explained  by  the  relatively  remote  standpoint 
occupied  in  common  by  the  writer  and  those  addressed. 
iSee  H.  H.  Wendt,  Das  Johannesevangelium,  1900. 


3l8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

render  a  certain  service  in  explaining  peculiarities  of  the 
fourth  Gospel.  But  we  find  no  sufficient  motive  to  make 
use  of  it  either  in  the  evidence  that  is  cited  in  its  behalf 
or  in  the  extent  to  which  it  has  commanded  scholarly 
conviction. 

11. —  Sources  and  Peculiarities. 

Various  statements  in  the  Johannine  writings  convey 
an  impression  of  aloofness  from  Judaism.  It  seems  to 
be  contemplated  not  infrequently  as  a  thing  external 
and  remote.  Were  we  to  take  two  or  three  sentences 
attributed  to  Christ  according  to  their  sound,  we  might 
conclude  that  even  He  is  represented  as  quite  willing  to 
disclaim  association  with  Judaism.  He  is  reported  as 
saying:  *'A11  that  came  before  me  are  thieves  and 
robbers."^  Again  He  is  said,  in  addressing  the  Jews,  to 
have  mentioned  the  ancestral  code  as  ''your"  law,^  and 
to  have  referred  to  it  in  conversation  with  His  disciples 
about  the  hatred  of  the  Jews,  as  "their"  law.^  The 
meaning  of  these  expressions  is  not,  however,  to  be  over- 
pressed.  The  first  does  not  denote  an  intention  on  the 
part  of  Christ  to  disclaim  Jewish  antecedents  in  general, 
but  rather  a  wish  to  put  Himself  in  contrast  with  such 
misleading  guides  as  false  Messiahs  and  the  unspiritual 
representatives  of  the  hierarchy.  As  for  the  other  ex- 
pressions, too  large  a  meaning  is  put  into  them  when 
they  are  made  to  imply  that  the  speaker  acknowledged 
no  part  in  the  law.  It  may  be  supposed  either  that 
Christ  used  them  to  emphasize  the  truth  that  the  atti- 

1  John  X.  8.  2  John  x.  34.  ^  John  xv.  25. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  319 

tude  of  the  Jews  was  reproved  by  the  very  authority 
which  they  themselves  specially  exalted,  or  that  the 
evangelist,  in  accommodation  to  the  Gentile  surround- 
ings in  the  midst  of  which  he  was  placed,  substituted 
"your"  and  "their"  for  "the"  in  citing  Christ's  refer- 
ences to  the  law.  The  latter  interpretation  may  be  re- 
garded as  commended  by  virtual  parallels  in  the  writer's 
usage.  Repeatedly  he  refers  to  the  Jews  as  an  entirely 
outside  party,  and  sets  them  over  against  Christ  as 
opponents,  using  a  national  term  in  such  connections 
as  the  Synoptists  apply  the  party  name  of  Pharisees.^ 
By  this  peculiarity  of  his  vocabulary,  standing  as  it  does 
unrelieved  by  any  expression  of  hope  for  the  refractory 
people,  he  gives  a  token  of  separation  from  Judaism 
scarcely  equalled  by  any  other  New  Testament  writer. 
Paul  indeed  uttered  grave  censures  against  the  Jews ; 
but  he  also  gave  evidence  of  an  affectionate  clinging  to 
his  nation,  and  was  not  ready  to  count  its  mission  in  the 
world  as  wholly  a  thing  of  the  past.  The  author  of  the 
Johannine  Gospel  and  Epistles,  on  the  other  hand,  shows 
no  interest  in  forecasting  a  future  for  the  Jewish  people. 
In  all  likelihood  this  unique  transcendence  of  the  old 
national  horizon  was  effectively  promoted  in  John  by  his 
contemplation  of  the  downfall  of  Jerusalem,  as  also  by  a 
consideration  of  the  stubborn  persistence  of  the  Jews  in 
their  rejection  of  Christ,  at  the  same  time  that  the  Gen- 
tile world  was  giving  a  broad  welcome  to  His  message. 
While  the  evangelist  assumes  this  distant  attitude  to- 
ward contemporary  Judaism,  he  does  not  question  the 
fulfillment  of  a  divine  vocation  by  the  Judaism  of  a  past 

1  John  V.  I,  10,  16,  18,  vL  52,  viL  i,  13,  x.  31,  xi.  8,  xviii.  20. 


320  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

age.  He  evinces  very  clearly  his  conviction  that  the 
Old  Testament  provided  foundations  for  the  gospel  dis- 
pensation. Christ  is  represented  as  claiming  before  the 
Samaritan  woman  that  salvation  is  from  the  Jews,^  as 
coming  to  His  own  proper  possession  in  His  advent  to 
the  Jews,2  as  calling  the  temple  His  Father's  house,^ 
and  as  referring  to  the  witness  of  the  ancient  Scriptures 
respecting  Himself.^  Events  in  the  life  of  Christ  are 
exhibited,  with  much  the  same  freedom  that  character- 
izes Matthew's  Gospel,  as  fulfilling  Old  Testament  texts.^ 
But  while  thus  the  authority  and  divine  function  of  the 
Old  Testament  are  unequivocally  recognized,  it  cannot 
be  said  that  the  evangelist  shows  very  much  of  an  inde- 
pendent interest  in  its  contents.  He  scarcely  reverts  to 
it  for  any  other  purpose  than  to  elicit  types  and  prophe- 
cies of  Christ's  work  and  experience.  In  his  epistles 
there  is  not  so  much  as  one  citation  from  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  and  only  one  reference  to  facts  recorded 
therein.  He  appears,  in  conformity  with  his  view  of 
the  cosmic  relation  of  Christ,  to  have  been  interested 
chiefly  in  what  might  be  called  ecumenical  truths. 
Though  in  the  narrative  portion  of  his  writings  he 
shows  plentifully  the  results  of  his  recollection  of  a  Jew- 
ish environment,  it  is  yet  plain  that  his  horizon  has  be- 
come world-wide  and  that  his  heart  is  upon  the  truths 
which  concern  men,  not  as  members  of  a  particular  na- 
tion, but  of  the  race. 

Reference  was   made  in    another  connection   to  the 

1  John  iv.  22.  3  John  ii.  i6. 

2  John  i.  II.  *  John  v.  39,  46. 
fi  John  xii.  14,  15,  xvii.  12,  xix.  24,  28,  36,  37,  xx.  9. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  321 

possible  indebtedness  of  the  Johannine  theology  to  the 
speculative  teaching  of  Alexandria.  We  may  repeat 
here  the  conclusion  that,  while  it  would  be  going  beyond 
warrant  to  affirm  categorically  that  John  was  directly 
conversant  with  the  writings  of  Philo,  it  seems  on  the 
whole  probable  that  he  came  by  some  means  into  con- 
tact with  his  way  of  thinking.  It  must  be  maintained, 
however,  that  the  evangelist  used  the  Philonic  teaching 
not  as  a  copyist,  but  as  a  man  of  strong  original  bent 
uses  material  from  any  source.  He  received  from  it 
only  what  was  congenial  to  his  point  of  view,  what,  so  to 
speak,  he  could  take  into  his  own  blood. 

This  last  remark  may  be  extended  to  the  relation  of 
John's  teaching  to  that  of  Paul.  Doubtless  in  a  gen- 
eral way  the  Pauline  theology  was  an  antecedent  to  the 
Johannine.  The  latter  takes  up  several  of  the  char- 
acteristic points  of  the  former.  It  contains  a  contrast 
between  the  law  system  of  Moses  and  the  grace  of 
Christ.  It  brings  out  also  the  supereminence  of  faith  as 
a  condition  of  salvation.  It  has  likewise  its  counterpart 
to  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  First  Corinthians  in  the 
extraordinary  emphasis  which  it  places  upon  love  as  the 
test  and  glory  of  religious  character.  It  contains 
furthermore  a  doctrine  of  election  sufficiently  pro- 
nounced to  remind  of  Pauline  sentences  on  this  subject, 
and  shows  in  the  mysticism  with  which  it  is  informed  a 
distinct  kinship  with  the  Pauline  conception  of  a  mutual 
indwelling  on  the  part  of  Christ  and  believers.  But  yet 
in  reading  the  Johannine  writings  we  scarcely  ever  meet 
a  phrase  which  seems  to  us  at  first  glance  to  bear  marks 
of  borrowing  from  Paul.     Whatever  of  Pauline  presup- 


322  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

positions  are  incorporated  in  them  appear  to  have  taken 
on  new  form  and  color  by  being  passed  through  a  mind 
as  strong  and  confident  in  its  way  as  was  that  of  the 
great  apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  For  example,  in  the 
reference  of  the  Johannine  writer  to  the  Mosaic  law 
there  is  no  trace  of  Paul's  polemical  vehemence.  He 
views  it  calmly,  not  as  a  threatened  yoKe,  but  simply  as 
a  conspicuous  factor  in  a  bygone  and  preliminary  dis- 
pensation. So  too  in  regard  to  faith :  however  highly 
he  may  exalt  its  function,  he  does  not  set  it  forth,  after 
the  Pauline  fashion,  in  sharp  antithesis  to  works;  he 
even  characterizes  it  as  a  foremost  work  required  of 
those  who  would  aspire  to  God's  favor.  Distinctive 
features  also  belong  to  his  way  of  broaching  the  subject 
of  election  and  to  his  mysticism.  While  then  we  may 
affirm  a  certain  obligation  of  John  to  Paul,  and  may 
question  whether  he  could  have  written  just  as  he  has 
but  for  his  powerful  predecessor,  we  are  still  obliged  to 
conclude  that  he  gave  forth  his  own  and  not  another 
man's  treasure.  Whatever  he  appropriated  was  com- 
pelled to  receive  a  Johannine  stamp  before  it  was  sent 
forth  into  the  world.  Aside  from  contact  with  the  per- 
son and  teaching  of  Christ  the  Johannine  theology  had 
no  more  influential  source  than  the  marked  individuality 
of  its  author.  He  wrote  as  he  did  because  it  was  in 
him  thus  to  write.  In  essential  character  he  was  the 
mystic,  the  man  of  contemplation,  distinguished  more  by 
intensity  and  depth  of  feeling  than  by  breadth  and 
versatility  of  intellect.  Getting  at  truth  by  intuition,  or 
^through  the  movement  and  satisfaction  of  his  emotional 
life,  he  imparts  it  by  a  corresponding  method.     Of  dis- 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  323 

cursive  reasoning  he  makes  little  or  no  use ;  he  contents 
himself  with  simply  presenting  to  the  contemplation  of 
others  what  had  so  deep  a  hold  upon  his  own  conscious- 
ness. Here  he  belongs  to  a  different  province  from  that 
which  was  often  represented  by  Paul  with  his  argumen- 
tative struggle  and  tension. 

It  accords  with  the  interior  and  contemplative  char- 
acter of  the  Johannine  theology  that  it  is  centred  upon 
a  few  supreme  truths,  and  the  more  immediate  deduc- 
tions from  these.  The  starting  point  is  the  highest 
object  of  contemplation,  the  divine  nature.  This  is 
described  under  a  few  comprehensive  categories.  The 
same  categories  for  the  most  part  enter  into  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  Son  of  God  as  belonging  to  the  divine  sphere. 
Revelation  takes  its  cast  from  the  nature  in  the  Father 
and  the  Son.  The  true  recipients  of  the  revelation 
which  is  made  in  and  through  the  Son,  are  so  conformed 
to  the  divine  nature,  that  the  terms  by  which  it  is 
described  belong  also  to  them  in  a  finite  sense,  and  their 
conduct  is  in  line  with  the  significance  of  these  terms. 
As  for  those  who  are  unresponsive  to  the  revelation, 
their  character  and  deeds  are  described  by  an  opposite 
set  of  terms.  Thus  the  divine  nature,  viewed  with 
respect  to  a  few  distinctive  aspects,  is  made  the  norm  or 
pattern  which  governs  the  whole  outlook  upon  the 
sphere  of  moral  and  spiritual  reality.  A  relatively  limited 
number  of  phrases  suffices  for  the  presentation  of  the 
whole  subject-matter.  So  largely  does  the  stress  gravi- 
tate toward  certain  central  truths  that  the  repetition  of 
propositions  in  slightly  varied  form  may  be  said  to  be  more 
characteristic  of  the  Johannine  writings  than  of  any  other 
New  Testament  books. 


324  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Another  way  of  describing  the  peculiarity  of  the 
Johannine  theology  would  be  to  compare  its  point  of 
view  with  that  of  Scholastic  realism.  In  this  assumption 
of  a  ground  of  comparison  it  is  not  implied  that  John 
was  conscious  of  subscribing  to  the  technical  theory  of 
the  mediaeval  realists  on  the  nature  of  universals. 
What  is  meant  is,  that  in  his  habit  of  mind  the  stress 
fell  upon  the  universal,  the  comprehensive  type,  and  that 
the  individual  was  rated  as  a  manifestation  of  the  type. 
He  regarded  the  concrete  visible  reality  on  the  field  of 
history  as  expressive  of  a  more  general  invisible  reality. 
In  pursuance  of  this  way  of  thinking  he  took  no  pains 
to  discriminate  intermediate  grades  of  character.  In  his 
portrayal  of  men  they  fall  into  broadly  contrasted  classes. 
Either  they  conform  to  the  type  which  is  given  in  the 
divine  nature,  and  being  begotten  of  God  do  not  sin,  or 
else  they  have  their  prototype  in  the  devil  and  are  given 
over  to  transgression.  Some  mitigation  of  the  sharp 
antithesis  may  be  provided  for  ;  but  it  is  plainly  charac- 
teristic of  the  Johannine  writings  to  describe  individuals 
under  general  terms  and  to  ignore  the  manifold  grada- 
tions which  fall  between  extremes. 

The  limitation  of  province  which  results  from  the  con- 
centration of  the  Johannine  teaching  upon  central  truths 
will  readily  appear  to  any  one  who  asks  for  its  conclusion 
upon  various  lines  of  Christian  thought.  That  teaching 
contains  next  to  nothing  respecting  the  sacraments,  and 
next  to  nothing  respecting  the  government  of  the  Church. 
It  has  no  compendium  of  civil  or  domestic  duty.  Of 
ethical  detail  in  any  direction  it  incorporates  but  little. 
The  emphasis  in  it  goes  to  principles  or  cardinal  phases 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  325 

of  religious  disposition,  rather  than  to  items  of  conduct. 
Its  theme  is  not  so  much  the  law  of  righteousness  in  its 
manifold  demands  as  the  inner  life  in  its  relation  to  a 
divine  source.  As  respects  the  outward  demonstration 
of  the  life  in  the  Christian,  it  enforces  only  the  general 
attitude  toward  the  brotherhood  which  is  dictated  by  the 
nature  and  conditions  of  that  life. 

In  respect  of  linguistic  peculiarities  the  Johannine 
writings  are  distinguished  by  a  remarkable  simplicity. 
The  vocabulary  is  limited.  Period-making  is  avoided. 
The  subject-matter  of  a  theme  is  developed  by  a  series 
of  short  declarations  which  are  connected  by  a  certain 
kinship  of  meaning,  but  are  not  structurally  articulated. 
"The  constructions,"  says  Westcott,  "are  habitually  re- 
duced to  the  simplest  elements.  To  speak  of  St.  John's 
Gospel  as  written  in  very  pure  Greek  is  altogether  mis- 
leading. It  is  free  from  solecisms  because  it  avoids  all 
idiomatic  expressions.  The  grammar  is  that  which  is 
common  to  almost  all  language."^  The  writer's  style 
may  be  regarded  as  one  among  the  evidences  of  his 
antecedents.  Though  he  wears  his  Greek  dress  with  a 
fair  degree  of  ease,  he  does  not  conceal  his  Hebrew  train- 
ing. In  the  parallelism  and  symmetry  of  his  clauses  it 
comes  quite  distinctly  into  evidence. 

III. —  Johannine  Antitheses. 

One  of  the  most  frequently  recurring  of  these  is  that 
between  Christ  and  Christians  on  the  one  hand  and  the 
world  on  the  other.     In  this  antithesis  "the  world  "  de- 

1  The  Gospel  according  to  St.  John,  introduction,  p.  50. 


326  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

notes  the  human  race  viewed  as  estranged  from  the  di- 
vine Hfe  and  made  incapable  of  appreciating  the  divine 
point  of  view  through  the  dominance  of  sensuous  and 
unspiritual  impulses  and  desires.  Instances  are  not  in- 
deed lacking  in  the  Johannine  writings  in  which  the  term 
is  employed  in  the  ordinary  sense  to  denote  the  sum  of 
created  beings.^  There  are  also  instances  in  which  it 
refers  to  the  human  race  without  distinctly  accentuating 
its  sinful  estate.^  But  in  a  majority  of  cases  the  term 
has  an  ethical  reference,  and  names  a  humanity  which 
in  its  controlling  temper  is  averted  from  God  and  His 
kingdom.  The  world  is  described  as  hating  the  Christ 
because  He  testifies  that  its  works  are  evil;  as  ignorant 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  incapable  of  receiving  Him ;  as 
lying  in  its  entirety  in  the  evil  one ;  as  being  under  dia- 
bolical headship;  as  hating  the  disciples  of  Christ  be- 
cause they  do  not  belong  to  itself ;  as  a  transient  scene 
of  empty  display  and  fleshly  lust,  to  which  those  who 
are  born  of  God  cannot  be  supposed  to  give  their  love.^ 

The  picture  which  is  given  of  the  world  seems  to 
promise  to  the  followers  of  Christ  upon  earth  a  continu- 
ous encounter  with  hatred  and  opposition.  The  stern 
prospect,  however,  is  not  left  without  a  great  mitigation. 
The  disciples  of  Christ  have  a  pledge  of  successful  re- 
sistance to  the  assaults  of  the  unfriendly  power  in  the 
fact  that  He  has  demonstrated  His  mastery  over  the 
world.^     It  found  nothing  in  Him  on  which  to  build  its 

ijohn  xvii.  5,  24.  2  John  i.  10,  xvi.  28. 

8  John  vii.  7,  viii.  23,  xii.  31,  xiv.  17,  30,  xv.  19,  xvii.  14;  i  John  ii. 
15-17,  iii.  13,  V.  19. 
4  John  xvi.  33. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  327 

dominion.^  In  putting  Him  to  death  it  does  not  so 
much  judge  Him  as  have  judgment  visited  upon  itself. ^ 
Thereby  is  made  manifest  not  only  its  enmity  but  its 
impotence  as  well.  For,  the  death  of  the  Son  of  God 
proves  to  be  the  most  potent  means  to  draw  men  out  of 
the  bonds  of  the  world,  and  likewise  the  direct  antece- 
dent of  His  demonstrated  superiority  to  any  death-work- 
ing power  which  the  world  can  use  against  Him.^  More- 
over, Christians  may  take  courage  in  view  of  their  inward 
furnishing.  Greater  is  He  that  is  in  them  than  he  that 
is  in  the  world.*  In  the  simple  fact  of  their  spiritual 
birth  they  have  a  pledge  of  victory.  "  For  whatsoever 
is  begotten  of  God  overcometh  the  world." ^ 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add  that  the  antithesis  under 
consideration  is  not  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  of  a  meta- 
physical dualism.  The  world  does  not  stand  for  an 
intrinsically  evil  entity,  an  irreformable,  refractory  sub- 
stance. It  stands  for  men  who  are  actually  under  the 
dominion  of  evil,  but  to  whom  nevertheless  the  love  of 
God  went  out  in  the  sending  of  His  Son.  A  world  that 
is  viewed  as  being  in  any  sense  the  object  of  God's  love 
is  evidently  not  meant  to  be  regarded  as  intrinsically  and 
hopelessly  evil.  It  may  be  in  one  point  of  view  the 
devil's  domain,  but  it  is  still  a  proper  subject  for  a  divine 
message  and  an  attempted  rescue. 

A  second  favorite  antithesis  with  John  is  that  between 
light  and  darkness.  The  two  terms  may  be  regarded  as 
having  an  implicit  reference  to  truth.     Light  is  a  symbol 

1  John  xiv.  30.  ■*  I  John  iv.  4. 

2  John  xii.  31,  32.  ^  i  John  v.  4. 
8  John  X.  18. 


328  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

for  truth  unmixed  with  error.  A  nature  uncorrupted  by 
falsity  in  disposition  is  in  affinity  with  light,  capable  of 
receiving  and  appropriating  truth.  Darkness,  on  the  other 
hand,  is  a  symbol  of  destitution  of  truth  through  falsity  of 
disposition.  Lacking  the  right  moral  purpose  and  the  right 
moral  appreciation  men  do  not  and  cannot  see.  Thus  the 
fallen  race  is  described  as  darkness  and  as  failing  to  appre- 
hend the  light  shining  into  it  through  the  agency  of  the 
Word.^  Furthermore,  men  are  described  as  being  in  their 
alienation  from  the  truth  postively  averse  to  the  light. 
The  falsity  of  their  disposition  makes  them  practically 
enemies  of  the  truth.  They  dread  the  self-discovery  and 
rebuke  which  must  come  from  having  its  light  thrown 
upon  them. 2  Here  the  ethical  nature  of  the  contrast 
expressed  by  the  terms  light  and  darkness  is  clearly 
apparent.  That  the  contrast  must  be  understood  in  this 
sense  is  also  shown  by  the  association  which  is  made  be- 
tween the  two  terms  and  love  and  hatred  respectively. 
"He  that  loveth  his  brother  abideth  in  the  light  and 
there  is  none  occasion  of  stumbling  in  him.  But  he 
that  hateth  his  brother  is  in  the  darkness  and  walketh 
in  the  darkness,  and  knoweth  not  whither  he  goeth,  be- 
cause the  darkness  hath  blinded  his  eyes."  ^  The  true 
disposition  is  illuminating ;  the  false  or  perverted  dispo- 
sition tends  to  obscurity  and  confusion. 

In  a  third  Johannine  antithesis  the  opposing  terms  are 
life  and  death.  Much  the  same  contrast  is  expressed  by 
these  terms  as  by  light  and  darkness.  Indeed  we  find 
the  former  set  used  in  the  same  relation  in  which  the 
latter  is  employed.     Thus  in  the  Epistle  it  is  said,  **  We 

1  John  L  5.  2  John  iii.  19-21.  ^  i  John,  ii.  10,  ii. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  329 

know  that  we  have  passed  out  of  death  into  Hfe,  because 
we  love  the  brethren.  He  that  loveth  not  abideth  in 
death."  ^  The  statement  suggests  that  hfe  belongs  with 
fullness  and  vitality  of  the  right  ethical  disposition, 
while  death  denotes  a  deficit  of  such  a  disposition.  In 
the  Gospel  also  the  two  contrasted  states  are  given  a 
close  association  with  moral  dispositions,  only  faith 
rather  than  love  is  here  made  the  determining  principle. 
He  that  believeth  hath  passed  out  of  death  into  life. 
He  that  believeth  not  shall  not  see  life .2  So  far  does 
the  stress  in  the  Johannine  representation  fall  upon 
the  moral  or  spiritual  side  of  the  subject  that  the 
physical  is  well-nigh  ignored.  The  declaration  which 
is  cited  from  the  lips  of  Christ,  "If  a  man  keep 
my  word,  he  shall  never  see  death,"  ^  js  certainly  fitted 
to  convey  the  impression  that  physical  death  is  of  no 
account. 

In  addition  to  these  characteristic  antitheses  there  ap- 
pears in  the  Johannine  writings  the  contrast  between 
flesh  and  spirit.  It  is  not  made,  however,  nearly  so 
prominent  as  in  the  Pauline  epistles.  Moreover,  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  John  brings  forward  a  much  less  vigorous 
impeachment  of  the  flesh  than  is  rendered  by  Paul. 
His  words  in  one  connection  imply  that  it  serves  as  a 
seat  of  illicit  desires.  *  It  is  not  said,  however,  that  it 
is  necessarily  or  by  virtue  of  its  nature  given  over  to 
this  evil  office,  any  more  than  this  is  said  of  the  eyes 
which  in  the  same  connection  are  described  as  instru- 
ments of    worldly    lusts.      In    the  broader    statement, 

1  I  John,  iii.  14.     Compare  i  John  ii.  9-1 1.  *  John  viii.  51. 

2  John  V.  24,  iii.  36.  *  i  John  ii.  16. 


330  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

"That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh,  and  that 
which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit,"  ^  the  inferior  term 
in  the  comparison  may  be  interpreted  as  denoting  the 
natural  in  opposition  to  the  distinctively  spiritual,  man 
considered  in  the  sense  relations  which  are  so  apt  to 
dominate  him  in  contrast  with  the  same  subject  made 
conformable  to  his  higher  relations.  We  should  need 
larger  means  of  definition  than  we  actually  possess  in 
order  to  be  certain  that  in  this  proposition  it  was 
designed  to  predicate  of  the  flesh  positive  hostility  to 
the  spiritual  ideal  and  not  simply  lack  of  appreciation  or 
of  true  affinity  therefor,  though  the  known  prefer- 
ence of  John  for  sharp  contrasts  might  warrant  the  sus- 
picion that  he  wrote  the  proposition  in  the  sense  of  the 
former  alternative.  That  the  proper  dualistic  notion  of 
the  flesh  is  not  imbedded  in  the  Johannine  theology  is 
quite  manifest.  A  writer  who  could  emphasize  so 
strongly  the  reality  of  the  flesh  of  the  sinless  Christ,  or 
speak  even  in  figure  of  eating  His  flesh,  cannot  be 
regarded  as  harboring  any  antipathy  toward  the  flesh,  as 
though  in  the  character  of  physical  substance  it  were 
evil. 

While  it  trespasses  against  good  exegesis  to  interpret 
the  Johannine  antitheses  in  the  sense  of  a  strict  or 
metaphysical  dualism,  it  must  be  granted  that  in  the 
Johannine  representation  the  dark  hemisphere  is  made 
quite  decidedly  dark.  An  extra  shade  of  blackness  is 
given  to  it  by  the  association  of  all  sin  with  diabolism. 
The  devil  is  represented  as  back  of  the  whole  stream  of 
moral  evil.     He  was  a  murderer  from  the  beginning. 

1  John  iii.  6. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  331 

The  first  homicidal  stroke,  whether  ministered  through 
the  hand  of  Cain  or  through  the  soHcitation  to  the 
death-working  trespass  of  Adam,  was  due  to  him.  He 
sinned  from  the  beginning,  from  the  opening  act  in  the 
tragedy  of  moral  evil.  The  world,  so  far  as  it  is  alienated 
from  God,  is  his  kingdom.  He  is  a  liar  and  the  father  of 
lies,  the  father  of  all  evil-doers.  Every  one  that  sinneth 
is  of  him.i  In  all  this,  it  is  observable,  nothing  is  said 
of  the  origin  of  the  devil.  The  assumption  is  simply 
that  he  stands  back  of  all  human  sinning,  not  as  relieving 
the  sinner  of  his  responsibility,  but  as  coagent  with  him 
and  as  the  head  with  which  in  sinning  he  becomes  con- 
federated. The  emphasis  falls  quite  as  much  upon  the 
type  as  upon  the  causal  ground.  The  effort  is  to  exhibit 
sin  and  the  sinner  as  being  of  the  devil-type.  As  was 
noticed  above,  to  represent  things  according  to  an  un- 
qualified type  is  characteristic  of  the  Johannine  writings. 
Along  with  a  relative  fullness  of  reference  to  the 
prince  of  the  evil  kingdom  the  Johannine  teaching  com- 
bines a  relative  silence  on  the  subject  of  angels.  It  con- 
tains no  positive  statements  respecting  evil  angels  or 
demons,  and  its  references  to  good  angels  are  very 
scanty.2 

IV. — The  Doctrine  of  the  Father  and  the  Son. 

The  superior  terms  in  most  of  the  Johannine  antitheses 
enter  naturally  into  the  description  of  God,  since  He  is 
the  absolute  contrast  to  all  that  is  dark,  impoverished,  or 

1  John  viii.  44,  xii.  31,  xiv.  30 ;  i  John  iii.  8,  10,  v.  19. 
*  John  ii.  51,  XX.  12. 


332  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

evil.  Among  the  statements  bearing  on  the  divine 
nature  three  have  the  form  of  definitions,  namely : 
"God  is  spirit,"  "  God  is  light,"  **God  is  love."  ^  It 
would  not  have  done  violence  doubtless  to  John's  way  of 
thinking  had  he  added,  God  is  life,  and  God  is  truth.  He 
has  presented  us  with  the  meaning  which  belongs  to 
statements  of  this  kind  in  speaking  of  the  Father  as 
having  life  in  Himself,^  and  styling  Him  the  true  God 
and  ultimate  source  of  all  saving  truth .^ 

With  the  definition  of  God  as  spirit  is  to  be  placed 
the  declaration  that  no  man  hath  seen  Him  at  any  time.* 
As  the  absolute  Spirit  He  is  beyond  all  cognizance  by 
corporeal  means,  as  He  is  beyond  all  limitations  of 
place.  One  locality  can  no  more  possess  Him  than 
another.  The  means  of  approach  to  him  are  and  must 
be  spiritual.  There  is  no  nearness  to  Him  except  in 
ethical  likeness,  and  no  distance  except  in  ethical  unlike- 
ness.  "  Everyone  that  loveth  knoweth  God.  He 
that  loveth  not  knoweth  not  God."^  The  invisi- 
bility, therefore,  which  is  predicated  of  God  has  no 
affiliation  with  the  idea  of  isolation.  Whatever  note  of 
transcendence  may  belong  to  the  Johannine  conception 
of  God,  it  makes  Him  thoroughly  accessible  to  the  one 
having  the  proper  organ  of  association.  Emphatic 
recognition  is  given  in  it  to  the  truth  of  the  divine  im- 
manence. Not  only  is  there  a  reference  to  an  indwelling 
Christ  or  Holy  Spirit,  but  it  is  said  of  the  Father  Him- 
self that  He  is  pleased  to  take  up  His  abode  with  the 

1  John  iv.  24 ;   i  John  i.  5,  iv.  16.  2  John  v.  26. 

*  John  V.  19,  20,  xiv.  10,  xvii.  3 ;   i  John  v.  20. 

*  John  i.  18.  ^  I  John,  iv.  7,  8. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  333 

obedient  disciple.^  Here  the  Johannine  mysticism  ad- 
vances a  step  beyond  the  Pauline.  No  New  Testament 
books,  in  short,  are  more  emphatic  than  the  Johannine 
on  the  divine  indwelHng. 

The  affirmation  that  God  is  Hght  may  be  made  with 
the  stress  upon  the  inner  nature,  and  thus  imply  that 
God  is  self-luminous,  having  in  the  perfect  harmony  of 
his  intellectual  and  ethical  being  no  ground  of  confusion 
or  darkness  in  Himself.  It  may  be  made  also  with  the 
stress  upon  causal  efficiency,  and  hence  convey  the 
meaning  that  the  universe  has  in  God  an  unfailing 
source  of  illumination.  We  may  suppose  the  two 
points  of  view,  as  they  are  perfectly  concordant,  to  have 
been  united  in  John's  thought,  and  that  he  meant  to 
describe  God  as  being  at  once  perfectly  unshadowed  in 
the  sphere  of  His  own  consciousness  and  as  infinitely 
light-giving.  There  may  also  be  contained  in  the  figure 
a  reference  to  the  nature  of  benevolence  as  universally 
diffusive  of  benefits. 

In  the  declaration  that  God  is  love  John  brings  to  a 
climax  the  theological  statement  of  the  import  of  the 
New  Testament  revelation.  The  declaration  means  two 
things.  It  means  in  the  first  place  that  God  is  in  fact 
infinitely  benevolent,  having  the  good-will  to  bring  bless- 
ing to  every  creature  that  in  the  fitness  of  things  can  be 
blessed.  In  the  second  place  it  means  that  this  un- 
stinted benevolence  or  good-will  is  not  the  result  of  an 
arbitrary  election,  but  deeply  based  in  the  ethical  nature 
of  God.  Theologians  have  sometimes  argued  that  God 
must  be  just,  but  in  respect  of  loving  anything  within 

'  John  xiv.  23. 


334  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  province  of  creation  His  will  can  give  the  decision, 
and  is  just  as  free  to  decide  one  way  as  another.  Such 
argumentation  collides  with  the  Johannine  declaration. 
If  love  is  not  as  deep,  as  intrinsic,  as  essential,  as  any- 
thing in  the  ethical  nature  of  God,  then  John  made  a 
mistake.  For  if  language  has  any  clear  sense,  the 
affirmation  that  "  God  is  love  "  must  signify  that  love  is 
fundamental  to  His  ethical  nature,  and  that  no  attribute 
or  activity  is  more  essential.  Indeed,  taken  by  itself 
the  Johannine  sentence  might  be  construed  as  subordi- 
nating all  other  divine  attributes  to  love.  But  probably 
there  was  no  distinct  intent  to  weigh  God's  love  against 
His  righteousness  or  holiness.  If  less  emphasized  than 
the  former,  the  latter  receives  still  a  distinct  tribute.^ 
The  thought  to  which  we  are  pointed  is  that  in  the 
deepest  depth  and  highest  height  of  the  Godhead  love  is 
present. 

The  term  Father  is  applied  to  God  in  a  multitude  of 
instances  in  the  Johannine  writings.  In  the  majority  of 
these  it  designates  the  relation  between  God  and  the 
Son  of  God.  In  some  instances  the  term  is  given  a 
broader  application.  Thus  in  the  address  to  the  Samari- 
tan woman  God  is  referred  to  as  the  Father,  to  whom 
all  true  worshippers  will  pay  their  ascriptions. ^  That 
God  holds  a  fatherly  relation  to  men  generally  is  not 
formally  stated  anywhere  in  the  Johannine  writings.  It 
may  be  said  also  that  the  stress  which  they  place  upon 
spiritual  rebirth  as  a  condition  of  a  filial  standing  and 
their  blunt  designation    of    sinners  as  children  of  the 

1 1  John  ii,  29,  iii.  7. 

2  John  iv.  23.      See  xv.  16,  xvi.  23 ;  i  John  ii.  i,  iii.  i ;  2  John,  3,  4. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  335 

devil  look  like  a  negation  of  the  conception  of  universal 
fatherhood.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  God's  love  for  the 
world  and  costly  provision  for  the  salvation  of  every  one 
that  can  be  persuaded  to  accept  His  gracious  offers 
argue  for  such  a  disposition  as  may  well  be  associated 
with  divine  paternity.  The  truth  seems  to  lie  in  a 
qualified  affirmation  of  universal  fatherhood.  According 
to  the  illustration  used  in  another  connection,  God  over- 
looks neither  the  man  in  the  sinner  nor  the  sinner  in  the 
man.  The  one  is  a  subject  for  His  fatherly  compassion; 
the  other,  for  His  displeasure  and  rebuke.  Only  with 
the  extirpation  of  his  better  capacities  does  a  man  de- 
scend wholly  to  the  plane  of  wrath.  John  has  not 
indeed  said  just  this;  but  if  we  put  together  what  he 
says  on  the  love  and  on  the  wrath  of  God  respectively 
the  result  seems  to  be  essentially  as  stated. 

In  dealing  with  the  person  of  Christ  John  does  not 
attempt,  any  more  than  did  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews,  to  construe  in  Him  the  relation  between 
the  human  and  the  divine.  He  contents  himself  with 
recognizing  both  the  one  and  the  other.  His  conscious- 
ness of  the  former  is  indicated  in  the  first  place  by  his 
representation  that  the  Son  of  God  came  in  the  flesh.^ 
In  his  terminology,  as  well  as  in  that  of  other  New 
Testament  writers,  the  flesh  denotes  more  than  mere 
bodily  substance.2  By  itself,  however,  it  does  not  in- 
clude an  indubitable  reference  to  every  constituent  of 
manhood,  to  the  Trvevfia,  as  well  as  to  the  ^Irvxv-  Ac- 
cordingly a  completer   sign   of    conviction  of    Christ's 

1  John  i.  14  ;  i  John  iv,  2.  2  John  iii.  6, 


336  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

humanity  is  furnished  by  the  picture  which  the  evangelist 
gives  of  human  experiences,  emotions,  and  elements  of 
consciousness  in  his  Master .^  This  order  of  statements 
has  been  taken  advantage  of  by  a  few  recent  writers  on 
biblical  theology  for  exhibiting  the  Johannine  teaching 
as  being  agreeable  to  their  humanitarian  predilections. 
But  their  construction  stands  as  little  chance  of  winning 
the  general  assent  of  scholars  as  did  the  Socinian  of  an 
earlier  day.  Critics  as  little  constrained  by  the  bonds  of 
orthodoxy  as  Pfleiderer  and  Holtzmann  make  no  question 
but  that  a  transcendent  or  essentially  divine  rank  and 
character  are  assigned  to  the  Johannine  Christ .^  And 
no  wonder ;  for,  let  the  revelation  on  the  human  side  be 
what  it  may,  it  is  still  true  that  it  is  like  asking  a  man  to 
deny  the  sight  of  his  eyes  to  set  him  to  discover  in  the 
Johannine  writings  only  a  human  Christ. 

Among  the  tokens  that  Christ  is  to  be  thought  of  as 
standing  essentially  on  the  plane  of  divinity  are  the 
following  :  (i)  A  suggestion  is  given  that  He  is  above 
the  creaturely  sphere,  and  ranks  as  a  kind  of  alter  ego 
of  the  Father,  in  that  the  characteristic  Johannine  terms 
which  are  used  to  define  the  one  are  used  to  describe 
the  other  also.  If  God  is  defined  as  light,  the  Son  also 
is  called  the  true  light,  the  source  of  illumination  to  men 
as  well  before  as  in  His  incarnation .^  If  God  is  repre- 
sented as  the  absolute  life,  the  Son  is  said  also  to  have 

1  John  iv.  6,  34,  xi.  33-38,  xii.  27,  xiii.  21,  xix.  28-30,  xx.  17. 

2  Holtzmann,  Lehrbuch  der  neutestamentlichen  Theologie ;  Pflei- 
derer, Urchristenthum.  Compare  Grill,  Untersuchungen  iiber  die 
Entstehung  des  vierten  Evangeliums  ;  Reville,  Le  Quatrieme  Evangile, 
son  Origine  et  sa  Valeur  Historique ;   Loisy,  Le  Quatrieme  Evangile. 

3  John  i,  4,  9,  viii.  12,  ix.  5. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  337 

life  in  Himself,  to  be  the  life,  and  thus  to  be  competent 
to  quicken  as  many  as  He  may  please.^  If  God  is  de- 
scribed as  the  true,  the  Son  is  called  the  truth.^  The 
representation  runs  precisely  as  though  the  latter  were 
regarded  as  the  substantial  image  of  the  former,  one  in 
whom  are  repeated  the  divine  perfections.  (2)  Titles 
are  ascribed  to  Christ  which  belong  to  a  divine  range. 
In  the  prologue  to  the  Gospel  He  is  declared  not  only  to 
have  been  with  God  but  to  have  been  God.  In  repeated 
instances  He  is  called  the  Son  of  God.  This  title  He 
shares  with  no  other;  for  it  is  a  pecuUarity  of  the  Johan- 
nine  writings  that  believers  are  never  called  sons  of  God. 
As  having  experienced  spiritual  rebirth  they  are  reKva  Oeov, 
but  the  term  Son  (vm)  is  reserved  to  their  Lord  and 
Master.  This  fact  could  hardly  have  come  about  by 
accident,  and  may  be  regarded  as  testifying  to  John's 
sense  of  the  uniqueness  of  Christ's  sonship.  The  use 
of  the  term  fiovoyevq^;  witnesses  still  further  to  the  ex- 
traordinary sonship  of  Christ.^  Likewise  the  context 
which  often  goes  with  the  filial  title,  testifying  as  it  does 
to  an  extraordinary  consciousness  of  copartnership  with 
the  Father,  argues  for  a  transcendent  kind  of  sonship. 
No  ordinary  filial  bond  gives  a  basis  for  such  declara- 
tions as  these :  "  The  Father  loveth  the  Son  and  hath 
given  all  things  into  His  hand.  .  .  My  Father  worketh 
until  now,  and  I  work.  .  .  .  The  Father  judgeth  no  man, 
but  He  hath  given  all  judgment  unto  the  Son,  that  all 
may  honor  the  Son  even  as  they  honor  the  Father.  .  .  . 
He  that   hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father.  .  .  .  All 

1  John  i.  4,  V.  21,  26,  xiv.  6.  2  John  xiv.  6. 

8  John  i.  14,  18;   I  John  iv.  9. 


338  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

things  whatsoever  the  Father  hath  are  mine."  ^  In  this 
line  of  statements  an  ethical  oneness  with  the  Father 
may  be  contemplated;  but  more  than  that  is  implied. 
Mere  identity  of  a  human  with  a  divine  will,  so  long  as 
a  proper  creaturely  consciousness  remains,  never  provides 
for  such  an  order  of  statements.  The  conclusion  is  en- 
forced that  back  of  the  ethical  union  of  Christ  with  the 
Father  a  transcendent  connection  in  the  order  of  being 
must  be  predicated.  (3)  Functions  and  attributes  are 
ascribed  to  Christ  which  associate  Him  with  a  divine 
sphere.  As  the  Logos  He  wrought  in  creation.  All 
things  were  made  by  Him ;  and  without  Him  was  not 
anything  made  that  hath  been  made.^  The  prerogatives 
of  resurrection  and  judgment  belong  to  Him.^  In  His 
consciousness  of  a  transcendence  of  temporal  limitations 
He  is  able  to  speak  of  a  glory  which  He  had  with  the 
Father  before  the  world  was,*  and  also  to  declare,  "Be- 
fore Abraham  was,  I  am."  ^  He  reads  the  secrets  of 
men's  hearts  and  forecasts  the  future  as  though  the  bar- 
riers to  ordinary  vision  were  transparent  to  his  glance.^ 
He  promises  His  disciples  that  He  will  do  whatsoever 
they  shall  ask  in  His  name.^  Even  so  momentous  a 
thing  as  the  mission  of  the  Holy  Spirit  He  conditions 
upon  His  own  agency,  promising  to  send  this  other 
Advocate  to  further  by  His  witness  the  work  which  He 
Himself  had  founded.^  (4)  The  practical  worth  of 
divinity  is  ascribed  to  Christ  in  the  measure  of  spiritual 

1  John  V.  17,  21-23,  ^iv,  9,  xvi.  15.  5  John  viii.  58. 

2  John  i.  3.  •  John  ii.  24,  25,  vi.  64. 
«  John  V.  21-29,  xi.  25.  '  John  xiv.  13,  14. 

*  John  xvii.  5.  *  John  xv.  26. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  339 

dependence  upon  Him  which  is  affirmed  of  men.  He  is 
the  bearer  of  eternal  life,  the  source  of  true  freedom, 
the  sole  way  of  access  to  the  Father.  The  disciple  can 
do  nothing  apart  from  Him.  If  a  man  abide  not  in  Him 
he  is  cast  forth  as  a  branch  and  is  withered.^ 

As  may  be  gathered  from  the  foregoing,  the  Johannine 
Christ ology  is  on  essentially  the  same  plane  as  that  of 
the  later  PauUne  Epistles  and  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews. 
A  few  statements  pertaining  to  the  first  may  seem,  it  is 
true,  to  come  nearer  to  an  affirmation  of  the  equality  of 
the  Son  with  the  Father  than  do  any  propositions  in  the 
other  writings.  Here  will  be  recalled  in  particular  the 
declaration,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one  "  ;  ^  also  the  ex- 
pression, "  that  men  may  honor  the  Son  even  as  they 
honor  the  Father."  ^  But  the  former  sentence,  though 
indirectly  pointing  to  a  transcendent  nature  as  testifying, 
along  with  kindred  utterances,  to  an  order  of  conscious- 
ness which  belongs  alone  with  such  a  nature,  has  probably 
a  direct  reference  rather  to  ethical  than  to  metaphysical 
oneness.  It  is  not  therefore  an  unequivocal  expression 
of  equality.  The  second  expression  taken  by  itself  be- 
speaks equality ;  but  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  equal 
honor  is  to  be  rendered  to  the  Son  on  the  score  of  an 
office  which  He  receives  from  the  Father.  Thus  the 
connection  assigns  a  certain  preeminence  to  the  Father. 
The  like  is  true  of  other  passages  which  give  an  exalted 
view  of  the  Son's  prerogatives.  In  the  midst  of  the 
highest  expressions  of  His  self -consciousness  the  Son 
acknowledges  a  certain   dependence  upon   the  Father. 

1  John  iii.  36,  viii.  36,  xiv.  6,  xv.  5,  6;  i  John  v.  11,  12. 
*  John  X.  30.  *  John  v.  23. 


340  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

This  in  no  wise  militates  against  the  fact  of  His  being 
the  eternal  Son.  Why  should  not  He  who  was  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Father,  as  He  trod  the  earth  in  human 
form  and  sought  to  win  men  to  the  Father,  give  an  ideal 
expression  of  the  spirit  of  sonship,  exhibiting  Himself  in 
no  sort  of  isolation  from  His  source,  but  as  ever  and 
perfectly  devoted  to  the  paternal  will?  Even  for  one 
eternally  and  metaphysically  the  Son  of  God  divine  dis- 
cretion would,  as  it  seems  to  us,  dictate  just  this  bearing. 
It  is  not  to  be  denied  nevertheless  that  the  total  repre- 
sentation of  John  involves  a  certain  aspect  of  subordina- 
tion in  the  position  of  the  Son.  In  some  sense  the 
Father  is  made  the  deeper  and  more  ultimate  spring  in 
the  Godhead,  while  the  Son  is  the  organ  of  universal 
manifestation. 

V. —  The  Holy  Spirit. 

As  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  so  also  in  the  writings  of 
John,  the  province  of  Christ's  pneumatic  nature  and  that 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  not  closely  discriminated.  The 
universal  function  of  the  Logos  in  the  rational  creation, 
as  the  bearer  of  light  and  life,  is  such  as  might  very 
naturally  be  associated  with  the  Holy  Spirit.^  On  the 
other  hand,  gifts  and  powers  which  might  be  regarded 
as  involved  in  the  pneumatic  nature  pertaining  to  Christ's 
personality  are  apparently  referred  to  the  Holy  Spirit; 
for  it  is  said  that  to  the  Son  God  "  giveth  not  the  Spirit 
by  measure."  ^  Once  more,  in  immediate  connection 
with  the  promise  to  send  the  Spirit  Christ  adds,  "  I  will 

1  John  i.  4.  2  John  iii.  34. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  341 

not  leave  you  desolate,  I  come  unto  you/'  ^  as  though 
the  coming  of  the  former  might  be  identified  with  His 
own  coming. 

Still  doubt  is  not  to  be  entertained  as  to  the  intent  of 
John  to  assign  a  distinct  standing  to  the  Holy  Spirit. 
No  more  is  it  to  be  doubted  that  in  his  references  the 
Spirit  is  contemplated  as  a  personal  agent.  He  is  placed 
over  against  Christ  as  another  Comforter  {7rapdKXr]To<;), 
another  Advocate  or  Helper,  as  the  name  might  also  be 
rendered  .2  Furthermore  the  Spirit  is  represented  as 
witnessing  to  Christ,  and  as  glorifying  Him  by  declaring 
the  message  relating  to  His  person  and  work.^  The 
Spirit  is  thus  in  the  office  of  representing  the  Son  dis- 
tinguished from  Him  much  as  the  Son  is  distinguished 
from  the  Father  whom  He  represents  without  excluding 
His  presence  from  the  sphere  in  which  the  representa- 
tion occurs.  That  in  one  or  another  connection  the  Son 
seems  to  accomplish  what  is  otherwise  made  a  function 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  may  be  explained  in  part  by  the  in- 
strumental position  of  the  latter.  As  sending  the  Spirit 
to  continue  the  work  visibly  inaugurated  by  Himself, 
the  Son  may  be  said  to  do  what  is  done  through  the 
Spirit.  In  performing  such  functions  as  witnessing, 
teaching,  and  convicting  of  sin,  righteousness,  and  judg- 
ment, the  Spirit  appears  in  a  personal  character.  The 
application  of  neuter  pronouns  to  Him  involves  no  denial 
of  this  character.  When  closely  associated  with  the 
neuter  substantive  irvevixa  the  pronouns  naturally  follow 
its  gender.  They  are  not,  however,  made  conformable 
in    every   instance.      The    original   text    shows    clearly 

1  John  xiv.  18.  ^xiv.  16.  ^xv.  26,  xvi.  13,  14. 


342  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

enough  that,  apart  from  the  pressure  of  grammatical 
propriety,  the  preference  of  the  speaker  or  narrator  was 
for  the  mascuHne  form  of  the  pronouns  to  denote  the 
Spirit.i 

The  language  of  the  fourth  Gospel  implies  an  eco- 
nomic subordination  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  Father 
and  the  Son.  Respecting  His  metaphysical  relations 
within  the  Godhead  it  offers  no  direct  statement.  The 
metaphysical  sense  that  has  been  put  into  the  clause, 
"which  proceedeth  from  the  Father,"  ^  is  based  on  a 
dogmatic  predilection.  The  words  are  more  naturally 
understood  of  a  procession,  or  sending  forth,  into  the 
sphere  of  action,  than  of  an  eternal  mode  of  subsistence. 
The  fact  that  Trapd  is  employed  here,  the  same  preposi- 
tion which  is  used  in  stating  the  going  forth  of  the  Son 
to  fulfill  His  mission,  supports  the  economic  sense.  As 
the  uniform  language  of  the  ancient  creeds  illustrates, 
the  technical  doctrine  of  procession  requires  for  its  suit- 
able expression  the  use  of  the  preposition  e/c.  It  is  notice- 
able also  that  the  Greek  fathers  in  citing  the  Johannine 
sentence  evince  a  disposition  to  substitute  eK  for  irapd? 

A  peculiarity  in  the  Johannine  exposition  of  the  work 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  stress  which  is  placed  upon  the 
production  in  men  of  a  Christ  consciousness.  In  the 
conversation  with  Nicodemus  the  Spirit  is  indeed  men- 
tioned as  the  agent  in  regeneration,*  and  in  the  interview 
of  the  risen  Christ  with  His  disciples  promise  is  given 

1  John  xiv.  26,  XV.  26,  xvi.  13,  14.  2  xv.  26. 

8  Westcott,  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  John,  p.  225.     Compare 
Dods,  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  I.  833. 
*  John  iii.  3-8. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  343 

that  they  shall  be  assisted  by  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the 
guidance  and  discipline  of  the  Christian  brotherhood.^ 
But  the  main  stress  falls  upon  the  idea  that  it  belongs 
to  the  Spirit  to  induct  men  into  evangelical  truth,  to 
carry  forward  the  teaching  function  which  Christ  ful- 
filled during  His  visible  ministry,  to  glorify  Christ  in  the 
thought  of  men  by  taking  of  the  things  of  Christ  and 
declaring  them,  in  a  word,  to  transfuse  into  the  minds 
and  hearts  of  men  a  vital  Christ  consciousness,  a  con- 
soling and  transforming  sense  of  union  with  Him  not- 
withstanding His  recession  from  the  sphere  of  the  out- 
ward vision.2  In  view  of  this  larger  and  more  effective 
impact  it  was  expedient  for  Christ  to  go  away.  By 
withdrawal  from  the  narrow  sphere  of  sense  observation 
He  was  all  the  better  prepared  to  become  a  universal 
power  in  men. 


VI.  —  The  Work  of  Christ. 

In  no  other  New  Testament  writings  is  so  much  made 
of  the  revealing  office  of  Christ  as  in  those  of  John.  In 
various  ways  the  sentiment  is  emphatically  expressed 
that  through  Him  a  saving  enlightenment  is  ministered 
to  men.  He  is  compared  in  His  office  to  the  illuminating 
agent  in  nature.  He  is  the  true  light  which  lighteth 
every  man,  the  light  of  the  world  in  following  whom 
men  escape  from  darkness  and  have  the  light  of  life,^ 
His  presence  in  the  world  serves  to  make  visible  the 
glory  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father.*      He  is  the 

1  John  XX.  23.  2  XV.  26,  xvi.  7-15  ;  i  John  ii.  20,  21. 

*  John  i.  9,  viii.  12.  *  John  i.  14. 


344  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

manifested  truth  and  the  manifested  life.^  The  true 
knowledge  of  God  is  eternal  life ;  ^  and  this  knowledge 
is  mediated  through  Christ.  The  unseen  Father  is  de- 
clared through  the  incarnate  Son  and  glorified  by  Him.^ 
So  perfectly  are  the  mind,  will,  and  purpose  of  God 
reflected  in  Him  that  he  that  hath  seen  Him  can  be 
said  to  have  seen  the  Father.*  His  economy  is  an 
economy  of  truth  as  well  as  of  grace.^  To  this  end 
came  He  into  the  world,  that  He  might  bear  witness  to 
the  truth.  ^  He  is  a  bearer  of  life  as  a  messenger  of 
truth.  His  words  are  words  of  eternal  life.^  While 
His  flesh  is  described  as  the  bread  given  for  the  life  of 
the  world,  the  explanation  is  added,  ''It  is  the  spirit  that 
quickeneth ;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  :  the  words  that 
I  have  spoken  unto  you  they  are  spirit  and  are  life."  ^ 
The  message  of  truth  is  thus  identified  with  the  meat 
which  the  Son  of  man  giveth  and  which  abideth  unto 
eternal  life.^  A  like  efficacy  is  assigned  to  His  message 
in  the  declaration  to  the  disciples,  "Already  ye  are  clean 
through  the  word  which  I  have  spoken  unto  you."  ^^ 
According  to  some  commentators  a  kindred  significance 
belongs  to  the  comprehensive  statement  that  the  blood 
of  Christ  cleanseth  from  all  sin,ii  the  reference  here 
being  not  so  much  to  the  remission  of  guilt,  as  to  the 
elimination  of  the  sinful  disposition,  and  this  being 
effected  by  the  manifested  love  and  righteousness  of 
God  in  Christ,  for  which  the  blood  is  the  symbol.     As 


1  John  xiv.  6 ;  i  John  i.  2. 

M.17. 

9  vi.  27. 

2  John  xvii.  3. 

*  xviii.  37. 

10  XV.  3. 

3  Johni.  18,  xvii.  4. 

7vi.68. 

11  I  John  i.  7. 

4  xiv.  9. 

8  vi.  63. 

THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  345 

we  conceive,  it  is  not  necessary  to  exclude  a  reference 
to  remission,  and  we  maintain  only  that  it  is  quite  conso- 
nant with  the  Johannine  way  of  thinking  to  associate 
cleansing  with  the  blood  of  Christ  on  the  ground  that  it 
is  a  message-speaking  blood,  the  bearer  to  men's  hearts 
of  an  order  of  truth  in  which  purifying  and  renovating 
virtue  resides.  In  Hne  with  the  ruling  conception  of 
Christ  as  the  revealer  of  saving  truth,  we  have  the 
further  representation  that  through  the  instrumentality 
of  the  Spirit  He  continues  in  the  glorified  state  His 
enlightening  office.  The  Spirit  sent  in  His  name,  as 
was  noticed  above,  has  the  work  of  vitalizing  in  men's 
souls  the  revelation  given  in  and  through  Him.  In 
short,  according  to  the  Johannine  representation  Christ 
came  into  the  world  as  a  truth-radiating  personality, 
and  fulfilled  in  large  part  His  saving  office  as  a  bearer 
and  impersonation  of  truth. 

Closely  related  to  the  foregoing  point  of  view,  indeed 
capable  of  being  included  under  it,  is  the  Johannine 
representation  of  the  work  of  Christ,  and  especially  of 
His  death,  as  the  supreme  specimen  of  loving  self- 
sacrifice.  The  parable  of  the  good  shepherd  emphasizes 
the  fact  of  this  self-sacrifice.  A  specially  significant 
expression  of  its  efficacy  is  contained  in  the  words, 
"  Verily  I  say  unto  you  except  a  grain  of  wheat  fall  into 
the  earth  and  die,  it  abideth  by  itself  alone ;  but  if  it  die, 
it  beareth  much  fruit."  ^  This  sentence  might  be  styled 
a  statement  of  the  law  of  the  reproductive  power  of 
self-sacrifice.  According  to  the  connection  it  applies 
both  to   Christ  and   His  disciples,  and  sets  forth  the 

1  John  xii.  24. 


346  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

great  truth  that  all  spiritual  fruitage  is  conditioned  upon 
the  deed  of  willing  self-devotement.  A  like  sentiment 
may  be  regarded  as  underlying  the  prophetical  declar- 
ation. "And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will 
draw  all  men  unto  myself."  ^  It  witnesses  to  the 
practical  potency  of  the  loving  self-sacrifice  manifested 
in  the  self -delivery  of  the  Son  of  God  to  the  ordeal  of 
the  cross. 

The  Johannine  teaching  represents  still  further  that 
Christ  fulfills  the  great  end  of  His  incarnation  by  bring- 
ing men  into  vital  connection  with  Himself.  Coming 
with  all  the  wealth  of  His  personality  into  the  human 
sphere  He  imparts  from  His  own  higher  life  to  those 
who  are  drawn  into  fellowship  with  Himself.  In 
description  of  this  mystical  and  efficacious  union  He  is 
able  to  say  to  his  disciples,  "I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the 
branches ;  he  that  abideth  in  me  and  I  in  him  the  same 
beareth  much  fruit."  ^  A  like  conception  is  contained 
in  the  declaration,  "  God  gave  unto  us  eternal  life,  and 
this  life  is  in  His  Son.  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  the 
life  ;  he  that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God  hath  not  the 
life."  3 

As  compared  with  the  Pauline  theology  the  Johannine 
does  not  so  fully  centre  the  attention  upon  the  death  of 
Christ.  It  is  less  emphatically  a  theology  of  the  cross. 
The  idea  of  revelation  comes  to  the  front,  and  in  con- 
formity therewith  large  account  is  made  of  the  life  of 
the  Redeemer.  It  is  manifest  too  that  John  was  less 
inclined  than  Paul  to  dwell  upon  the  judicial  aspect  of 
Christ's  work.     Most  of  what  the  former  says  is  in  line 

J  John  xii  32.  2  John  xv.  5.  *  i  John  v.  11,  12. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  347 

with  the  moral-mfluence  and  mystical  theories  of  atone- 
ment. Still,  it  needs  to  be  acknowledged  that  in  the 
background  of  the  Johannine  representation  there  is  a 
sufficiently  distinct  recognition  of  essentially  the  same 
objective  phase  of  atonement  as  appears  elsewhere  in 
the  New  Testament.  This  is  especially  noticeable  in 
the  Epistle.  Nothing  in  the  Pauline  writings  more 
clearly  implies  that  the  universal  dispensation  of  grace 
is  based  upon  Christ's  work  than  does  the  Johannine 
declaration  that  He  is  the  propitiation  (lXaa/i6<;)  for  the 
sins  of  the  world.^  A  kindred  view  with  respect  to  the 
saving  office  of  the  Redeemer  is  implied  in  the  affirma- 
tion that  He  is  with  the  Father  as  an  advocate  for  the 
one  who  has  sinned,^  as  also  in  the  statement  that  for- 
giveness of  sins  takes  place  for  His  name's  sake.^  In 
the  Gospel  there  is  no  formal  assertion  of  such  an 
objective  value  in  Christ's  work  as  is  indicated  by  the 
term  propitiation ;  but  the  idea  which  belongs  with  that 
term  is  implicitly  recognized  in  the  designation  of  Christ 
as  "the  Lamb  of  God,"*  in  the  representation  that  He 
was  to  die  for  the  people,^  in  the  assertion  of  the 
necessity  of  His  death,^  in  the  description  of  His  death 
as  a  voluntary  offering  or  sacrifice,''  and  in  the  declaration 
that  access  to  the  Father  is  solely  through  Him.^ 

Vn. — ^The  Initiation  and  Unfoldment  of 
THE  New  Life. 
By  limiting  the  attention  to  a  few  sentences  of  the 
Johannine  writings  one   may  get  much   the  same    im- 

1  I  John  ii,  IV.  10.       *  John  i.  29,  36.       ''  John  x.  17,  18. 

2  I  John  ii.  I.  6  John  xi.  50-52.       ^  John  xiv.  6. 
*  I  John  ii.  12.         ®  John  iii.  14. 


348  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

pression  of  determinism,  or  divine  election,  as  a  few 
sentences  of  the  Pauline  epistles  are  fitted  to  convey. 
Christ  is  represented  as  conditioning  the  ability  of  men 
to  come  to  Himself  and  to  believe  His  message  upon  the 
effectual  working  of  the  Father.  **A11  that  which  the 
Father  giveth  me,"  He  says,  "shall  come  to  me."  "No 
man  can  come  to  me  except  the  Father  which  sent  me 
draw  him."  "Glorify  thy  Son,  that  the  Son  may  glorify 
thee  :  even  as  thou  gavest  Him  authority  over  all  flesh, 
that  whatsoever  thou  hast  given  Him,  to  them  He  should 
give  eternal  life."  "  The  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's 
name,  these  bear  witness  of  me.  But  ye  believe  not, 
because  ye  are  not  of  my  sheep."  ^  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  there  are  sentences  which  give  an  emphatic  im- 
pression of  the  universality  of  divine  grace.  The  saving 
purpose  of  God  is  represented  as  reaching  out  to  the 
world.  The  Son  is  sent  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world. 
He  is  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world. 
He  is  lifted  up  in  order  that  He  might  draw  all  men 
unto  Himself.  The  burden  of  His  complaint  against 
the  unbelieving  is,  "  Ye  will  not  come  unto  me  that  ye 
may  have  life."  ^  If  then  the  apostle  is  to  be  reconciled 
with  himself,  the  former  order  of  expressions  must  be 
understood,  not  as  implying  an  arbitrary  division  of  men 
into  opposing  classes,  but  simply  the  truth  that  men 
reach  the  attitude  of  faith  only  as  they  are  led  up  to  it 
by  a  special  divine  preparation.  Combining  the  two 
orders  of  expressions  we  obtain  the  conclusion  that  men 

1  John  vi.  27 f  44?  xvii.  i,  2,  x.  25,  26.     See  also  vi.  39,  65,  ix.  39,  xii. 
38-40;  I  John  ii.  19. 

2  John  iii.  16,  v.  40,  xii.  32  ;   i  John  ii.2,  iv.  14. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  349 

are  at  once  deeply  dependent  upon  the  divine  working 
and  free  to  cooperate  with  or  to  resist  it. 

Salvation,  or  the  sum  of  benefits  brought  by  Christ,  is 
frequently  described  in  the  Johannine  writings  by  the 
phrase  "eternal  life."^  As  the  phrase  is  used  in  both 
the  Gospel  and  the  Epistle,  it  denotes  the  inward  enrich- 
ment and  enduring  blessedness  which  come  from  union 
with  the  Father  through  the  Son.  Doubtless  we  shall 
not  be  in  error  if  we  impute  to  the  compendious  expres- 
sion a  meaning  closely  akin  to  that  which  is  contained  in 
the  S)nioptical  expression,  "  the  kingdom  of  God,"  or 
"the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  taken  in  its  more  subjective 
application. 

In  speaking  of  the  attainment  of  salvation  it  is  char- 
acteristic of  John  to  pass  by  the  terms  descriptive  of 
relationship,  and  to  employ  those  descriptive  of  nature. 
He  stands  in  contrast  with  Paul,  in  that  he  enters  into 
no  discourse  upon  justification  or  adoption.  It  is  the 
interior  character  of  the  child  of  God  rather  than  the 
filial  standing  or  relationship  that  he  emphasizes.  His 
leading  thought  is  that  of  being  born  anew  (or  being 
born  from  above,  as  some  prefer  to  render  av(t)6ev),  or  be- 
ing begotten  of  God.^  The  new  bent,  disposition,  or  life 
potency  signified  by  these  terms,  he  regards  as  the  pro- 
duct of  the  mysterious  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  Of 
any  sacramental  agency  in  connection  with  the  change 
he  has  very  little  to  say.  A  possible  reference  to  bap- 
tism appears  indeed  in  the  words  addressed  to  Nico- 

1  John  iii.  15,  iv.  36,  vi.  54,  68,  x.  28,  xii.  25,  xyii.  2,  3 ;  i  John  L  2,  ii. 
25,  V.  II,  13,20. 

2  John  i.  12,  13,  iii.  3-8 ;  i  John  ii.  29,  iii.  i,  2,  9,  iv.  7,  v.  i,  4,  18. 


350  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

demus.  ^  But  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  the  reference 
occurs  in  a  sentence  designed  to  illustrate  the  meaning 
of  a  misunderstood  term;  and  hence  may  be  regarded 
not  so  much  as  emphasizing  the  instrumentality  of  water 
as  intimating  by  its  means  that  the  new  birth  denotes  a 
cleansing  or  purifying  as  well  as  a  renewing  of  its  sub- 
ject. In  any  event  the  passage  as  a  whole  makes  the 
instrumentality  of  water  quite  subordinate  to  the  agency 
of  the  Spirit.  It  contains  no  statement  that  the  work- 
ing of  the  Spirit  is  tied  to  the  rite  of  baptism  ;  on  the 
contrary  it  virtually  denies  this  notion.  The  supposition 
that  the  new  birth  can  be  attached  at  pleasure  to  an  ex- 
ternal occasion  is  discountenanced  by  the  declaration ; 
*'The  wind  bloweth  where  it  listeth,  and  thou  hearest 
the  voice  thereof,  but  knowest  not  whence  it  cometh, 
and  whither  it  goeth :  so  is  every  one  that  is  bom  of  the 
Spirit." 

The  first  of  the  statements  in  the  fourth  Gospel  re- 
specting the  new  birth  makes  it  dependent  upon  faith.^ 
In  this  statement,  too,  is  contained  the  Johannine  idea 
that  faith  has  in  Christ  its  proper  object.  Of  course  it 
was  not  in  the  mind  of  John  to  dissociate  the  Father 
from  the  Son  as  an  object  of  believing  apprehension. 
But  treating  of  the  Son  as  the  bearer  of  salvation  he 
speaks  mainly  of  faith  as  directed  to  His  person  and 
work.^  In  a  number  of  instances  the  connection  sug- 
gests that  by  faith  he  means  only  a  mental  assent  to  a 
given  order  of  facts.     It  is  evident,  nevertheless,  when 

1  John  iii.  5.  ^  John  i.  12,  13. 

8  John  iii.  15,  16,  18,  36,  vi.  29,  40,  vii.  38,  viii.  24,  xx.  29,  31 ;  i  John 
iii.  23,  V.  I. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  351 

we  glance  at  his  total  representation,  that  faith  stood 
with  him  for  an  ethical  bearing  as  well  as  for  an  intel- 
lectual conviction.  In  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Gospel 
he  makes  the  believing  on  Christ  equivalent  in  its  efficacy 
to  eating  His  flesh  and  drinking  His  blood  —  terms 
which  signify  a  most  thorough  appropriation  of  Christ  as 
a  ground  of  religious  satisfaction  and  a  spring  of  spiritual 
life.  The  criticism  also  which  was  passed  upon  the 
Pharisees,  to  the  effect  that  they  were  in  no  condition  to 
believe  as  seeking  glory  one  of  another,  indicates  that 
faith  is  inclusive  of  a  moral  disposition .^  In  short,  it  is 
not  to  be  doubted  that  in  the  Johannine  conception  faith 
involves  a  self-committal  which  brings  into  intimate  fel- 
lowship and  affinity  with  its  object. 

Along  with  faith  John  magnifies  knowledge,  depicting 
it  in  some  instances  as  a  source  of  salvation,  in  others  as 
a  proof  or  result  of  a  regenerated  nature.  ^  In  his  esti- 
mate of  the  true  gnosis  he  vies  with  the  most  apprecia- 
tive utterances  of  Paul  as  contained  in  the  Epistles  to  the 
Colossians  and  Ephesians.  It  would  be  a  mistake,  how- 
ever, to  suppose  that  in  this  he  was  rendering  any 
tribute  to  a  speculative  grasp  of  truth.  The  knowledge 
that  he  commended  is  that  practical  knowledge  which  is 
dependent  upon  the  religious  disposition,  which  comes 
through  inner  conformity  to  Him  who  is  the  truth. 
Doubtless  he  thought  of  it  as  including  a  vital  heartfelt 
assurance  of  divine  favor  and  love.-^ 

The  distinctive  attributes  and  tests  of  Christian  char- 

1  John  V.  44. 

2  John  vii.  17,  viii.  31,  32,  xvii.  3,  17;  i  John  ii.  3,  4,  20,  21,  27,  iii.  6, 
iv.  7,  8.  *  John  xiv.  21,  23. 


352  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

acter,  as  set  forth  by  John,  are  righteousness  and  love. 
He  pictures  the  Christian  as  one  who  has  totally  re- 
nounced sin,  and  whose  relation  to  Christ  and  to  God 
excludes  it  absolutely.  "Whosoever  abideth  in  Him 
sinneth  not :  whosoever  sinneth  hath  not  seen  Him, 
neither  knoweth  him.  .  ,  .  Whosoever  is  begotten  of  God 
doeth  no  sin,  because  his  seed  abideth  in  him :  and  he 
cannot  sin,  because  he  is  begotten  of  God."^  This  is 
description  according  to  the  unqualified  type.  It  pic- 
tures the  ideal  to  which  the  Christian  in  perfect  fidelity 
to  his  calling  must  conform.  That  a  margin  of  possible 
deflection  from  the  ideal  has  to  be  recognized  was  not 
ignored  by  John.  He  speaks  accordingly  of  a  gracious 
provision  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins  that  are  not  unto 
death,2  and  represents  Christ  as  saying  that  even  the 
fruit-bearing  branch  needs  pruning  in  order  to  attain 
unto  its  best  capacity  of  fruitfulness.^ 

No  words  could  surpass  in  emphasis  those  with  which 
John  insists  upon  love  as  essentially  descriptive  of  the 
Christian.  He  carries  up  the  demonstration  of  its  ne- 
cessity to  the  highest  possible  point,  in  defining  God  as 
love  and  describing  Christians  as  those  who  are  begotten 
of  God.  Being  in  fellowship  with  the  infinite  personal 
Love  and  bearing  His  likeness  they  can  but  live  the  life 
of  love,  paying  a  full-heart  tribute  both  to  God  and  to 
the  brother.  The  great  historic  incentive  to  this  love 
is  the  manifestation  of  the  love  of  God  in  sending  His 
Son.  Among  the  inward  benedictions  which  it  brings 
at  the  stage  of  perfection  is  the  expulsion  of  all  fear.* 

1 1  John  iii.  6,  9.  ^i  John  ii.  i,  2,  v.  16,  17.  ^  John  xv.  2. 

*  John  xiii.  34,  xiv.  21-24,  xv.  9,  10,  12,  13,  xvii.  21,  26;  i  John  ii.  9- 
II,  iii.  10-12,  14-18,  iv.  7-21,  V.  I,  2. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  353 

VIII. —  The  Christian  Brotherhood. 

Church  constitution  receives  no  attention  in  the  Johan- 
nine  writings.  The  word  Church  is  not  so  much  as  men- 
tioned, except  in  the  third  Epistle.  Elsewere  there  is 
reference  only  to  a  brotherhood  or  flock  of  Christ. 
Stress  is  placed  upon  the  unity  appropriate  to  this 
brotherhood ;  ^  but  no  official  bonds  of  unity  are  speci- 
fied. 

A  nearly  equal  silence  is  maintamed  in  respect  of 
ordinances.  Mention  is  mdeed  made  of  the  fact  that 
the  disciples  of  Jesus  baptized,^  but  at  that  stage  the 
ceremony  could  have  had  no  distinct  ecclesiastical  asso- 
ciation such  as  belonged  to  it  from  the  day  of  Pentecost. 
It  was  a  token  of  repentance  in  preparation  for  the  king- 
dom.3  Of  baptism  as  a  proper  church  rite  no  word  is 
spoken  by  John.  Even  if  the  mention  of  water  in  the 
discourse  on  the  new  birth  is  to  be  understood  of  Chris- 
tian baptism,  it  is  only  its  import  for  individual  experi- 
ence, not  its  ecclesiastical  function,  that  comes  into 
account.  The  reference  to  water  in  i  John  v.  6  does 
not  call  for  consideration  here,  as  it  concerns  only  the 
baptism  of  Christ  at  the  initiation  of  His  ministry. 

No  unequivocal  reference  to  the  eucharist  is  found  in 
the  Johannine  writings.  It  may  be  granted  that  at  the 
time  the  evangelist  penned  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Gos- 
pel it  was  natural  that  some  of  its  terms  should  suggest 
to  his  mind  the  sacrament  of  Christ's  body  and  blood. 
But  the  discourse  of  this  chapter  has  no  direct  bearing 

1  John  X.  16,  xvii.  21,  22  ;  i  John  ii.  19,  iii.  14-18. 

2  John  iU.  22,  iv.  i,  2.  »  See  Matt.  iv.  17  ;  Mark  i.  14,  15. 


354  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

on  the  subject  of  the  eucharist.  In  the  first  part  of  the 
discourse  the  same  office  precisely  is  ascribed  to  faith 
which  in  the  second  part  is  ascribed  to  the  eating  of 
Christ's  flesh  and  the  drinking  of  His  blood.  Moreover, 
the  concluding  declaration  (verse  63)  takes  the  acts  de- 
scribed as  eating  and  drinking  entirely  out  of  the  cate- 
gory of  material  transactions,  and  identifies  them  with  a 
spiritual  function.  It  is  necessary  therefore  to  regard 
the  discourse  as  a  figurative  and  graphic  means  of  en- 
forcing the  spiritual  appropriation  of  the  whole  message 
of  divine  truth  in  Christ.  As  Westcott  remarks  :  "  The 
people  had  eaten  of  the  loaves ;  that  which  it  was  their 
highest  blessing  to  do  was  to  eat  the  Son  of  Man.  This 
eating  is  essential  to  all,  inasmuch  as  without  it  there  is 
no  life  and  no  resurrection.  And  further,  this  eating 
leads  necessarily  to  life  in  the  highest  sense ;  it  has  no 
qualifications  (such  as  eating  worthily) ;  it  is  operative 
for  good  absolutely.  It  follows  that  the  eating  cannot 
refer  primarily  to  the  holy  communion ;  nor  again  can 
it  be  simply  prophetic  of  that  sacrament.  The  teaching 
has  a  full  and  consistent  meaning  in  connection  with  the 
actual  circumstances,  and  it  treats  essentially  of  spiritual 
realities  with  which  no  external  act,  as  such,  can  be  co- 
extensive. The  well-known  words  of  Augustine,  crede 
et  manducasti,  '*  believe  and  thou  hast  eaten,"  give  the 
sum  of  the  thoughts  in  a  luminous  and  pregnant  sen- 
tence." ^ 

With  the  progress  of  sacerdotalism  in  the  Church  there 
was  a  tendency  to  utilize  the  reference  to  i-emitting  and 
retaining  sins  in  John  xx.  23  in  behalf  of  a  priestly  func- 

1  The  Gospel  According  to  St.  John,  p.  113. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  355 

tion  of  absolution.  But  this  interpretation  savors  of 
gratuitous  exaggeration.  The  words  in  question  were 
spoken  to  the  company  of  the  disciples.  There  is  noth- 
ing on  record  which  requires  us  to  suppose  that  they 
were  addressed  exclusively  to  the  apostles  or  to  any 
circle  of  officials.  The  parallel  reference  in  Luke  xxiv. 
33-36  indicates  that  others  besides  the  twelve  were 
included  in  the  company  upon  which  Christ  pronounced 
His  benediction,  and  to  which  He  pledged  the  assistance 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  was  not  then  a  special  sacerdotal 
prerogative  which  the  words  of  Christ  described,  but  a 
function  of  the  Christian  body  as  such.  Speaking  ideally, 
or  on  the  supposition  that  the  Christian  body  would  be 
fully  submitted  to  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  He 
affirmed  that  in  establishing  rules  of  conduct  and  admin- 
istering discipline  over  its  members,  it  would  but  execute 
the  divine  will.  Its  binding  and  loosing  upon  earth,  to 
use  the  Synoptical  phrase,  would  correspond  with  that  in 
heaven ;  in  other  words,  the  adjustment  of  the  relations 
of  men  to  the  brotherhood  would  reflect  their  real  rela- 
tions to  the  kingdom  of  God.  If  in  place  of  the  brother- 
hood as  a  whole  one  prefers  to  regard  the  apostles  as 
contemplated  in  the  promise,  the  meaning  is  still  remote 
from  the  sacerdotal  theory  of  a  judicial  prerogative  in 
the  priest  over  the  confessing  penitent.  There  is  no 
question  here  of  remitting  or  retaining  sins  in  the  emi- 
nent sense,  but  only  in  the  secondary  sense  of  that 
power  of  passing  judgment  which  belongs  to  religious 
society  when  fulfilling  to  the  best  its  vocation.  Certainly 
it  is  the  unequivocal  dictate  of  reason  that  no  human 
society,  or  set  of  officials,  can  forgive  sins  in  the  eminent 


356  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

sense,  since  the  divine  judgment  is  absolutely  final  in 
determining  the  status  of  the  individual  as  approved  or 
condemned,  and  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  any  human 
sentence  can  either  get  ahead  of  the  divine  judgment  or 
control  the  same.  The  best  that  the  human  sentence 
can  do  is  to  follow  and  give  effect,  in  the  accessible  rela- 
tions of  a  given  subject,  to  the  divine  judgment.  This 
end  the  optimistic  and  idealizing  words  attributed  to 
Christ  contemplated  as  about  to  be  realized  in  the  Chris- 
tian brotherhood. 

IX. ESCHATOLOGY. 

Some  of  the  Johannine  representations  seem  well-nigh 
to  cancel  the  antithesis  between  the  two  worlds,  and  to 
take  away  all  occasion  for  contemplating  a  future  crisis. 
Thus  eternal  life  is  frequently  spoken  of,  not  as  a  remote 
inheritance,  but  as  a  present  possession.  "He  that 
believeth  on  the  Son  hath  eternal  life."^  "He  that 
eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my  blood  hath  eternal  life."^ 
"The  witness  is  this,  that  God  gave  unto  us  eternal  life, 
and  this  life  is  in  His  Son."^  Again  there  are  references 
to  the  coming  of  Christ  which  seem  to  identify  it,  not  with 
the  visible  inauguration  of  a  dispensation  radically  diverse 
from  the  present,  but  with  a  spiritual  advent  to  men  still 
living  in  the  common  earthly  relations.*  Still  further, 
there  are  sentences  which  picture  judgment,  not  as  the 
event  of  a  future  day,  but  as  an  ordeal  that  is  now  being 
visited  upon  one  class  of  men,  and  for  another  class  has 
been  put  entirely  away.^     Once  more,  in  various  connec- 

1  John  iii.  36.         2  John  vi.  54.  »  i  John  v.  1 1. 

*  John  xiv.  18,  23.      5  John  iiL  18,  19,  ix.  39,  xii.  31,  v.  24. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  357 

tions  the  resurrection  is  given  a  present  and  spiritual 
application,  and  the  disciple  is  spoken  of  as  if  instated 
here  and  now  in  an  order  of  life  which  makes  physical 
death  practically  of  no  significance.^ 

Expressing  the  sense  of  the  foregoing  we  may  say 
that  the  apocalyptic  element,  or  the  thought  of  the  out- 
ward crisis,  is  not  prominent  in  the  Johannine  teaching. 
Its  favorite  point  of  view  is  that  of  the  spiritualism 
which  makes  minor  account  of  distinctions  of  time  and 
place  and  centers  its  contemplation  upon  the  relations  of 
the  soul  to  God  and  upon  the  fruition  of  the  life  that  is 
lifted  up  into  close  fellowship  with  Him.  Still  the  apoc- 
alyptic element  is  not  wanting.  The  ordinary  postulates 
of  New  Testament  eschatology  evidently  lay  in  the  back- 
ground of  John's  mental  picture  of  the  future.  In  at 
least  one  instance  he  makes  an  unequivocal  reference  to 
the  coming  of  Christ  in  the  sense  of  a  distinct  manifesta- 
tion at  a  special  epoch,^  and  there  are  other  probable 
references  to  an  advent  of  the  like  kind.^  He  speaks 
also,  or  represents  Christ  as  speaking,  of  a  last  day  and 
of  a  resurrection  and  a  judgment  associated  with  that 
day.*  On  these  topics  there  is  apparently  a  combination 
of  the  ideas  of  process  and  consummation.  "As  the 
future  resurrection  seems  to  be  viewed  as  an  element, 
and,  in  some  sense,  as  the  consummation  of  the  Son's 
bestowment  of  life  upon  mankind,  so  the  future  judg- 
ment appears  to  be  regarded  as  the  culmination  of  a 
process  of  judgment  which  is  inseparably  connected  with 

1  John  V.  24,  25,  viii.  51,  xi.  25,  26. 

2  I  John  ii.  28.  8  John  xiv.  3,  xxi.  22. 
*John  V.  28,  29,  vi.  39,  40,  44,  54,  xii.  48;  i  John  iv.  17. 


358  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  presence  and  effect  of  divine  light  and  truth  in  the 
world."  ^  That  the  consummation  of  judgment  will  leave 
some  men  outside  the  pale  of  eternal  life  was  manifestly 
the  thought  of  John.  His  recognition  of  a  sin  unto  death 
—  that  is,  an  offence,  or  series  of  offences,  against  the 
light  so  aggravated  as  to  cancel  religious  sensibility  — 
testifies  to  that  effect.^ 

As  compared  with  the  Apocalypse,  the  Johannine 
writings  here  considered  are  distinguished  by  reticence 
on  the  heavenly  life.  The  many  mansions  of  the  Father's 
house,  the  being  with  Christ  and  beholding  His  glory, 
the  seeing  God  or  Christ  as  He  is  and  being  like  Him 
— these  few  phrases  include  the  whole  message  that  is 
delivered  respecting  the  inheritance  in  store.^  The 
brevity  of  the  message,  however,  does  not  prevent  its 
being  exceedingly  rich  in  content. 

X. —  Conclusion. 

The  opinion  has  sometimes  been  expressed  that  the 
Johannine  type  represents  the  goal  of  doctrine  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  is  fitted  to  serve  as  the  ultimate 
Christian  theology.  This  opinion,  it  strikes  us,  cannot 
be  accepted  without  very  considerable  qualification. 
With  all  its  excellencies  the  Johannine  type  is  not  a 
substitute  for  other  New  Testament  types.  The  Syn- 
optical teaching  fulfills  an  important  function  in  its 
greater  wealth  of  ethical  detail.  It  has  also  some 
special  features  as  respects  the  characterization  of  God 

1  Stevens,  The  Johannine  Theology,  p.  347. 

2  I  John  V.  16.  2  John  xiv.  2,  xvii.  24 ;   i  John  iii.  2. 


THE  JOHANNINE  THEOLOGY  359 

for  which  the  Johannine  teaching  does  not  compensate. 
Lofty  as  is  the  latter,  it  has  a  tinge  of  vagueness  and 
mysticism.  The  Synoptical  description  of  the  heavenly 
Father  as  exercising  a  minute  and  tender  providence, 
and  as  generously  welcoming  the  returning  prodigal,  pro- 
vides for  a  more  homelike  feeling  in  the  divine  presence 
than  is  fostered  by  John's  less  concrete  representations. 
No  less  is  there  room  for  the  Pauline  type  alongside  the 
Johannine.  The  former,  if  it  does  not  reach  deeper  than 
the  latter,  does  excel  in  variety  of  ethical  and  religious 
content.  Moreover,  it  ministers  in  a  superior  degree  an 
incentive  to  world-conquering  enterprise.  Paul  was  a 
man  in  whom  missionary  aspiration  was  at  a  maximum. 
He  could  almost  wish  himself  accursed  from  Christ  for 
his  brethren,  his  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh.  He 
counted  himself  a  debtor  both  to  the  Greek  and  the  Bar- 
barian. He  was  ever  anxious  to  lay  new  foundations 
for  the  Gospel  and  to  voice  through  a  widening  circle 
the  call  to  men  to  be  reconciled  to  God.  And  thus,  as 
bearing  the  stamp  of  his  spirit,  his  epistles  are  naturally 
a  perennial  source  of  missionary  incentive.  With  the 
Johannine  writings  it  is  different.  The  love  of  God  is 
indeed  represented  as  going  out  to  the  world,  and  the 
inference  may  be  drawn  that  Christians  should  follow 
the  divine  precedent.  Nevertheless,  it  is  true  that  in 
general  the  world  in  these  writings  is  set  over  against 
Christians  as  a  kind  of  alien  domain.  Love  for  the 
brotherhood  is  fervently  inculcated,  but  very  little  is  said 
which  conveys  any  impression  of  an  obligation  of  out- 
reaching  affection  for  the  unevangelized  world.  The 
Johannine  teaching  opens  the  door  upon  a  beautiful  and 


36o  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

transfigured  life  of  intimate  fellowship  with  God  and  of 
pure  love  to  the  children  of  God.  Herein  it  fulfills  a 
high  office.  But  it  needs  certainly  to  be  supplemented 
by  the  Pauline  teaching  with  its  larger  infusion  of  mis- 
sionary ardor  or  spirit  of  world-conquering  enterprise. 
The  truth  is,  no  one  of  the  New  Testament  types  is  to 
be  elected  as  giving  by  itself  the  complete  doctrinal 
standard.  One  may  excel  another  in  important  respects, 
but  it  is  by  their  united  contributions  that  the  full-orbed 
truth  of  the  new  dispensation  is  made  to  shine  upon  the 
minds  and  hearts  of  men. 


INDEX 


Abbot,  E.,  304,  316 

Abbott,  T.  K.,  182 

Acts,  Book  of,  124  f.,  140  ff. 

Adeaey,  W.  F.,  259 

Adoption,  238,  349 

Advent,    the   second,   117  ff.,   169, 

258  ff.,  356  f. 
Allegorizing,  the  Alexandrian,  22, 

29!.;  the  Pauline,  194! 
Alexandrianism,  20 ff.,  272,  321 
Alogi,  the,  303 

Angelology,  20,  99,  208,  282  f.,  331 
Antitheses,    Pauline,    213  ff. ;    Jo- 

hannine,  325  ff. 
Apocalypse  of  John,  130  ff.,  158  ff. 
Apocryphal  Gospels,  52  ff. 
Apostles,  their  office,  109  ff.,  142  f. 
Assiu-ance,  241  f.,  351 
Atonement,  11, 12, 19,  105  ff.,  146  f., 

16s  f.,  228  ff.,  286ff.,  343ff. 
Augustine,  203 

Bacon,  B.  W.,    78,    181  f.,   187  f., 

259,  278 
Baldensperger,  W.,  12 
Baptism,  113  ff.)  148  ff.,  2555.,  296, 

350,  353 
Baruch,  Apocal3^se  of,  9,   14,  18, 

38 
Beyschlag,  W.,  67,  203,  236,  278, 

298 
Binding  and  loosing,  no  ff.,  354  ff. 
Bishops,  143,  167,  254  f.,  268 
Bousset,  W.,  13,   18,  74,  90,   139, 

259 


Briggs,  C.  A.,  58 

Bruce,  A.  B.,  80,  236,  256,  273 

Charles,  R.  H.,  13,  16,  100 

Chase,  F.  H.,  124,  278 

Church,  the,    107 ff.,    140  ff.,   157, 

167  f.,  252  ff.,  295  f.,  353 
Christology,  18  f.,  31,  56  ff.,  99  ff., 

144  ff.,    162  ff.,     219  ff.,    284  ff., 

335  ff. 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  54,  145 
Clement  of  Rome,  145 
Colossians,  Epistle  to  the,  31,  I79ff. 
Conception,  the  supernatural,  56  ff. 
Cone,  O.,  220,  231,  236 
Corinthians,  Epistles  to  the,  177, 

179 
Cremer,  A.  H.,  231 

Dalman,  G.,  59,  89,  100 
Deacons,  143,  254  f .,  268 
Demonology,   20,   98  f.,    209,   283, 

Denney,  J.,  222,  231,  293 

Devil,  the,  see  Sa^an 

Didache,  145 

Divorce,  251  f. 

Dods,  M.,  342 

Drummond,  J.,  24  ff.,  35,  305,  309 

Ecclesiasticus,  18,  21,  36,  89 
Egyptians,  the  Gospel  according  to 

the,  53 
Elders,  143  f.,  157,  255,  268,  295 
Election,  see  Predestination 


361 


362 


INDEX 


Enoch,  Book  of,  9,   12  f,,  15,  38, 

100 
Ephesians,  Epistle  to  the,  31,  I'jgS. 
Eschatology,  Jewish,  14  ff .,  20,  27  ; 

Christian,  95,  iiyff.,  i69f.,  2585., 

297  ff.,  356  flF. 
Essenes,  the,  6  ff. 
Eucharist,  the,  115!,  148,   257  f., 

296,  353  ^• 
Eusebius,  48flf.,  54,  307  f. 
Evangeh'sts,  254 
Ezra,  Fourth  Book  of,  9f.,  14,  18 

Faith,  81  f.,   155,  167,  187,  239  ff., 

294 fv  350 
Family,  the,  2505.,  295 
Fatherhood  of   God,  8gS.,   153  f., 

201  f.,  334f. 
Findlay,  G.  G.,  185 
Flesh,  as  opposed  to  spirit,  97  f., 

213 ff.,  281,  329! 

Galatians,  Epistle  to  the,  177  f. 
Garvie,  A.  E.,  205,  231 
Gifford,  E.  H.,  231 
God,  conceptions  of,  11,  2^,  87  ff., 

I53>  199  ff-,  278  ff.,  331  ff. 
Godet,  F,,  222,  231,  236,  264 
Gould,  E.  P.,  77 
Grace,    £ls    contrasted    with    law, 

217  ff.,  265 
Grill,  J.,  35,  336 

Handmann,  R.,  53 

Harnack,  A.,  50 ff.,  128,  183,   188, 

274,  276,  278 
Haupt,  E.,  120,  182 
Hawkins,  J.  C.,  50,  124 
Hebrews,  Epistle  to  the,  32f.,27off.; 

Gospel  according  to  the,  52 


Heinrici,  C.  F.  G.,  208 

Hesse,  F.  H.,  188 

Hippolytus,  59 

Hirscht,  A.,  134 

Holtzmann,  H.  J.,  7,  14,  125,  128, 

203,  228,  236,  278,  336 
Hort,  F.  J.  A.,  150 

Ignatius  of  Antioch,  308 
Irenseus,  132,  307 

James,  epistle  of,  36,  126  ff.,  153  ff., 

275f. 
Jesus,  His  nativity,  56  ff.;  His  self- 
consciousness   as   a    subject    of 
development  and  source  of  teach- 
ing, 59  ff.;  His  witness  respecting 
His  own  person  and  ofl&ce,  99  ff. 
See  Christology 
John,  question  of  his  indebtedness 
to    Alexandrianism,   33  ff.,  321; 
evidences  as  to   his   authorship 
of    the    fourth    Gospel,    300 ff.; 
sources,      characteristics,      and 
teachings  of  this  Gospel,  3i8ff. 
Josephus,  II,  15,  17 
Jubilees,  Book  of,  9,  18,  38 
Judgment,  the,  122,  159,  170,  265, 

297»  356f. 
Jude,  Epistle  of,  37,  278 
Jiilicher,  A.,  49  f.,  115,  178!,  278 
Justification,  156,  167,  235  ff.,  293, 

349 
Justin  Martyr,  14,  55,  59 

Kaftan,  J.,  236 
Kattenbusch,  F.,  115 
Kautzsch,  E.,  13 
Kennedy,  H.  A.  A.,  259,  266 
Kenosis,  Doctrine  of  the,  224f. 


INDEX 


363 


Kingdom  of   God,   or  of   heaven, 

Klopper,  A.,  78 
Knowling,  R.  J.,  148 

Lambert,  J.  C,  ii4f.,  258 

Lange,  J.  P.,  231 

Lagrange,  M.  J.,  12 

Law,  the,    10,   79,  126,  127,   155, 

217  fif. 
Lightfoot,  J.  B.,  49,  182,  316 
Lipsius,  R.  A.,  222,  231,  236 
Lobstein,  P.,  58 
Logia,  the,  48  ff. 
Loisy,  A.,  336 

McGiflfert,  A.  C,  188,  272 

Man,  his  nature  and  condition,  18, 

30,  93  fif.,  154,  209  ff.,  280 ff.,  324, 

329f. 
Marriage,  250!,  267  f. 
Mary,  the  Virgin,  168 
Mayor,  J.  B.,  127,  129 
Menegoz,  E.,  s^,  273,  290 
Messiah,    Jewish  doctrine  of  the, 

II  ff.,  18,  25,  229;   Messiah  Ben 

Joseph,  12 
Meyer,  H.  A.  W.,  222,   231,   236, 

298,  303 
Millennial  reign,  169! 
Moffatt,  J.,  50,  51,  119,  259,  278 
Morality,  as  related  to  religion,  68ff. 
Moule,  H.  C.  G.,  182 

Nitzsch,  F.,  236 

Origen,  54 
Olshausen,  H.,  231 

Papias,  48,  309! 


Pastoral  Epistles,  186  ff.,  266  ff. 

Pastors,  254f. 

Paul,  the  apostle,  question  of  his 

indebtedness      to     Pharisaism, 

17  ff.,  to  Alexandrianism,   28ff.; 

sources  of  his  theology,   188  ff.; 

his  teachings,  199  ff. 
Peabody,  A.  P.,  316 
Peake,  A.  S.,  273,  289 
Peter,  the  apostle,  109  ff.,  143,  255; 

First  Epistle  of,  270 ff.;  Second 

Epistle,  276 ff,;  so-called  Gospel 

of  Peter,  54 
Pfleiderer,  O.,  19,   28  f.,  177,  221, 

228,  336 
Pharisaism,  8ff.,  18  ff.,  69 
Philemon,  Epistle  to,  179,  184 
Philippi,  F.  A.,  231 
Philippians,  Epistle  to  the,  i79f. 
Philo,  21  ff. 
Plumtre,  E.  H.,  278 
Poor,  blessing  upon  the,  83  f. 
Porter,  F.  C.,  139 
Prayer,  92,  168 
Predestination,    17,    85  ff.,    203  ff., 

242  f.,  347  f-» 
Preexistence  of  souls,  25,  26 
Prophets,  254 

Quartodecimans,  304  f. 

Ramsay,  W.  M.,  161  f. 
Ranch,  C.,  139 

Reconciliation,  see  Atonement 
Regeneration,  76,  156,  238  f.,  293, 

349^- 
Renan,  E.,  184 
Repentance,  81  f.,  294 
Resurrection,  15,  27,  121  f.,  261  ff., 

297  f.,  356  f.;  of  Christ,  234,  292 


3^4 


INDEX 


Retribution,  future,  122,  265  f.,  297, 

358 
Revelation,  Book  of,  see  Apocalypse 
Reville,  J.,  336 
Ritschl,  A.,  231 
Robertson,  A.,  151 
Ropes,  J.  A.,  55 

Sabatier,  A.,  87 

Sadducees,  5,  6 

Salmon,  G.,  183 

Salmond,  S.  D.  F.,  183,  207 

Sanctification,  243  ff.,  293  £f.,  352 

Sanday,  W.,  115,  222,  231,  236 

Satan,  98,  161,  209,  330  f. 

Schmidt,  N.,  loi 

Schmiedelj  P.  W.,  125 

Schultz,  H.,  7 

Sharman,  H.  B.,  78 

Siegfried,  C,  28,  iz^  35 

Smith,  W.  R.,  271 

Sin,  96,  154,  211,  281,  326  ff. 

Somerville,  D.,  41 

Son  of  God,  102,  221,  284,  336 f. 

Son  of  Man,  995. 

Spirit,  the  Holy,  105,  147  f.,  i64f., 

221  f.,  226  ff,,  340  ff. 
Spitta,  F.,  130,  278 
Stanton,  V,  H.,  53,  54,  305,  309 
State,  obligations  to  the,  249,  295 


Stevens,  G.  B.,  99,  118,  167,  231, 

236,  259 
Suetonius,  162 
Swete,  H.  B.,  55 
Synoptical  Gospels,  395. 

Tacitus,  137 
Teachers,  254 
Tennant,  F.  R.,  212 
Terry,  M.,  134,  231 
Thessalonians,    Epistles     to    the, 

172  ff. 
Tholuck,  F.  A.  G.,  231 
Tongues,  speaking  with,  151  f. 
Toy,  C.  H.,  208 

Von  Soden,  H.,  182,  271,  278 

Weber,  F.,  9,  12,  26 

Weiss,  B.,  220,  236,  259,  278,  298 

Weizsacker,  C.,  125,  139 

Wellhausen,  J.,  7 

Wendt,  H.  H.,  317 

Wernle,  P.,  50 

Westcott,  B.  F.,  273,  325,  342 

Wisdom  of  Solomon,  21,  24  f.,  28  f., 

89*  145 
Wrede,  D.  W.,  176 

Zahn,  T.,  127,  186,  269,  278,  309 


'YHE 

following 

pages 

contain  advertisements 

of  a  few  of  the  Macmillan 

books   on 

kindred   subjects 

^ 

By  henry  C.  king 

Reconstruction  in  Theology 

"  Its  pages  represent  what  is  nearly,  if  not  actually,  the  high- 
water  mark  of  skill  and  success  in  blending  a  fearless  yet 
discriminating  progressiveness  with  a  loyal  conservatism  in 
theology." —  The  Congregationalist. 

Cloth,  i2mo,  $1.50  net;  by  mail,  $1.62 

Theology  and  the  Social  Consciousness 

"A  valuable  contribution  to  current  discussion.  ...  It  is 
not  scholastic ;  it  is  not  phrased  in  the  technical  language  of 
the  schools  ;  the  thoughtful  layman  will  readily  understand 
it."  —  Tke  Outlook. 

Cloth,  crown  8vo,  $1.25  net;  by  mail,  $1.35 

By  WILLIAM  D.  HYDE 

Outlines  of  Social  Theology 

"  The  dominating  idea  of  Dr.  Hyde's  book  is  indicated  by 
its  title,  'Outlines  of  Social  Theology.'  It  is  not  sociology 
viewed  theistically ;  it  is  theology  viewed  socially.  It  is  full 
of  life,  of  blood,  of  nerves.  In  it  the  author  reflects  in  fresh 
and  vital  statements,  the  latest,  and  what  The  Outlook  re- 
gards as  the  best,  theological  thought  of  our  time.  But  this 
he  does  not  as  a  mere  reporter ;  he  is  a  thinker  who  has  felt 
the  influence  of  the  Zeitgeist,  and  reproduces  in  remarkably 
clear  statements  truths  which  lie  in  modern  consciousness, 
either  as  undefined  experiences  or  as  individual  but  not  cor- 
related truths."  —  The  Outlook. 

$1.50  net;  by  mail,  $1.61 


PUBLISHED    BY 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


By  the  Rev.  WALTER  RAUSCHENBUSCH 

Professor  of  Church  History  in  Rochester  Theological  Seminary 

Christianity  and  the  Social  Crisis 

"  It  is  of  the  sort  to  make  its  readers  feel  that  the  book  was 
bravely  written  to  free  an  honest  man's  heart ;  that  conscientious 
scholarship,  hard  thinking,  and  the  determination  to  tell  the  truth 
as  he  sees  it,  have  wrought  it  out  and  enriched  it ;  that  it  is  written 
in  a  clear,  incisive  style  ;  that  stern  passion  and  gentle  sentiment 
stir  at  times  among  the  words,  and  keen  wit  and  grim  humor  flash 
here  and  there  in  the  turn  of  a  sentence  ;  and  that  there  is  a  noble 
end  in  view.  If  the  hope  be  too  confident,  if  there  be  once  in 
a  while  a  step  taken  beyond  the  line  of  justice  into  indignation,  if 
a  quaint  old  prejudice  or  even  animosity  bustles  to  the  front  in  an 
emergency  —  no  matter.  It  is  a  book  to  like,  to  learn  from,  and, 
though  the  theme  be  sad  and  serious,  to  be  charmed  with."  — 
New  York  Times^  Saturday  Review  of  Books. 

Clothy  i2mo,  $i.jo  net 

By  Dr.  SHAILER  MATHEWS 

Professor  of  Historical  and  Comparative  Theology  in  the 
University  of  Chicago 

The  Gospel  and  the  Modern  Man 

"This  is  a  strong,  sane  book,  which  ought  to  be  widely  read. 
The  author  faces  the  difficulties  of  our  modern  situation  with  clear 
insight  and  perfect  frankness,  and  he  shows  with  literary  skill  and 
convincing  logic  that  while  some  old  notions  must  be  abandoned, 
the  essential  facts  and  forces  of  historical  Christianity  not  only 
remain  untouched  by  destructive  criticism,  but  issue  from  this 
searching  examination  with  increased  power  and  beauty."  —  The 
Dial. 

"  It  is  a  pleasure  to  find  such  lucidity,  temperance,  and  insight  as 
Professor  Mathews  has  shown  in  *  The  Gospel  and  Modern  Man.' 
He  introduces  his  incisive  question  at  once  and  proceeds  to  answer 
it.  .  .  .  It  may  easily  be  accounted  among  the  best  books 
America  has  produced  within  the  past  twelve-month  upon  the 
subject."  —  Christian  Advocate. 

Cloth,  i2mo,  $i.jo  net;  by  mail,  $i.6o 


PUBLISHED    BY 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


New   Testament   Handbooks 

Edited  by  SHAILER  MATHEWS,  D.D. 

Dean  and  Professor  of  Historical  and  Comparati've  Theology y  Uni'versity  of  Chicago 


The  Ethics  of  Jesus 

By  henry  CHURCHILL  KING 

$1.50  net;  by  mail,  $1.62 
The  History  of  the 
Textual  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Professor  MARVIN  R.  VINCENT,  Professor  of 
New  Testament  Exegesis,  Union  Theological  Seminary 

$1.00  net;  hy  mail,  $1.15 

The  History  of  the 

Higher  Criticism  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Professor  HENRY  S.  NASH,  Professor  of  New 
Testament  Interpretation,  Cambridge  Divinity  School 

$1.00  net;  hy  mail,  $1.15 

Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  New  Testament 

By  Professor  BENJAMIN  W.  BACON,  Professor  of 
New  Testament  Interpretation,  Yale  University 

$1.00  net;  hy  mail,  $1.15 

The  History  of  New  Testament  Times  in  Palestine 

By  Professor  SHAILER  MATHEWS 

$1.00  net;  hy  mail,  $1.15 
The  Teaching  of  Jesus 

By  Professor  GEORGE  B.  STEVENS,  Professor  of 
Systematic  Theology,  Yale  University 

$1.00  net;  hy  mail,  $1.15 

The  Biblical  Theology  of  the  New  Testament 

By  E.  p.  GOULD,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Inter- 
pretation, Protestant  Episcopal  Divlnit}-  School,  Phila- 
delphia $1.00  net;  by  mail,  $1.15 

PUBLISHED   BY 

THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

64-66  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York 


Date  Due 

0  19  -SJ 

Ap  7  -  '4i 

1 

US-  'k 

1 

1 

Ja  27  '4 

> 

' 

4& 

^  '4 

?i-  ■•« 

N  53  ■;- 

r  ■       1 

'.>'     ,    '..'       /  . 

._          ^.               mm 

\ 

%  1      4 

9 

MR  25' 

48 

FACULTV 

HBMI  J    "'"^liii 

-— — * 

^^gi^Mgjjg^ 

;^*i«TrT?' 

^ 

1 

Princeton  Theological 


Seminary-Speer  Libra'' 


™ 1012  01022  7546 


itjljiitjtj^t>£-»2 


;-|^p||^ 


